RE: Quick question on isakmp-registry.

["Michelle S. Cotton" <cotton@icann.org>]

I agree completely.

Should I then send the IESG the detailed application
and have a decision made on the next telechat?

Michelle


-----Original Message-----
From: iesg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 12:05 AM
To: Steven M. Bellovin; IANA
Cc: Thomas Narten; IESG
Subject: Re: Quick question on isakmp-registry. 




--On søndag, mai 11, 2003 21:49:31 -0400 "Steven M. Bellovin" 
<smb@research.att.com> wrote:

> I don't see the relevance of this draft.  In fact, though it defines
> two new message types, it doesn't even have an IANA Considerations
> section.  My question is broader -- there's no document that tells you
> or the IESG how to proceed in this registry.  That needs to be fixed.

the generic IANA document says that in the absence of specific guidance, 
IANA is to follow tradition.
For registries from which we have never handed out values, the tradition 
could be seen as not handing out values :-)

so I think IANA can, if it wants to and has the support of the IESG, say 
"these values will not be handed out without the IESG telling us it's OK".

                 Harald, being restrictive