Evaluation: draft-klyne-msghdr-registry - Registration procedures for message header fields to BCP

[IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>]

Last Call to expire on: 2002-12-4

	Please return the full line with your position.

                    Yes    No-Objection  Discuss *  Abstain


Harald Alvestrand   [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Steve Bellovin      [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Randy Bush          [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Bill Fenner         [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Ned Freed           [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Ted Hardie          [ X ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Russ Housley        [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Allison Mankin      [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Thomas Narten       [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Erik Nordmark       [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Jon Peterson        [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Bert Wijnen         [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]
Alex Zinin          [   ]     [   ]       [   ]      [   ]


 2/3 (9) Yes or No-Objection opinions needed to pass.

 * Indicate reason if 'Discuss'.

^L
To: IETF-Announce:;
Dcc: *******
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@isi.edu>,
 Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>,
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
Subject: Protocol Action: Registration procedures for message header 
         fields to BCP
-------------


The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'Registration procedures for
message header fields' <draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-06.txt> as a BCP.
This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF
Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Ned Freed and Ted Hardie.
   
 Technical Summary
   
   This specification defines registration procedures for the message
   header field names used by Internet mail, HTTP, newsgroup feeds and
   other Internet applications.

   Benefits of a central registry for message header field names
   include:

       o providing a single point of reference for standardized and widely-
             used header field names;

       o providing a central point of discovery for established header
             fields, and easy location of their defining documents;

       o discouraging multiple definitions of a header field name for
             different purposes;

       o helping those proposing new header fields discern established
             trends and conventions, and avoid names that might be confused
             with existing ones;

       o encouraging convergence of header field name usage across multiple
             applications and protocols.

 Working Group Summary
   
   This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF
   Working Group.
   
 Protocol Quality
   
   Ned Freed reviewed the document for the iESG.

 RFC Editor note

   The IPR boilerplate is missing from this document and needs to be added.