Re: IANA Considerations

[Ned Freed <ned.freed at mrochek.com>]

> On Jul 6, 2005, at 11:20 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
> > This is exactly what I predicted would happen - the IANA
> > considerations section has now become part of the boilerplate in at
> > least one I-D template. (Actually make that two - I put in in my own
> > equivalent template some time back.)
> >
> > This opens the door to the author forgetting to check and the various
> > reviewers assuming the prsence of the sections means a check was done.

> I suppose. That said, if IANA considerations was *not* built into the
> boilerplate, it would have a high likelihood of being omitted.

Which would then be noted on checklist review, causing a fairly careful check
to be made to see if there really aren't any considerations to be listed in
such a section.

> This argument is a little like saying that the Security considerations
> is part of the boilerplate and therefore Security will not be
> considered even if the document says it was considered. Good grief.

On the contrary, the cases could not be more different. We believe that is the
rare and exceptional document that doesn't have security considerations to
discuss. As such, either the presence of a section saying "there are no
security considerations" is a big red flag that immediately triggers a careful
security review to make sure there really aren't any.

Documents without any IANA considerations, on the other hand, are qutie common
and perfectly legitimate.

> The
> purpose of the IANA section is to make IANA's job easier - if there is
> something to allocate, they have to read the relevant parts of the
> document anyway, but if there is nothing for them to consider, they can
> be told that up front. Given all the work we put into reviews, is it
> really likely that this will not be reviewed?

Not only is it likely, we have actual running code:
draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-04.txt, recently approved by the IESG (and now
the subject of an appeal) contains IANA considerations and an IANA
considerations section saying there aren't any. And this happened while this
requirement was new and people were still paying attention to some extent. What
do you think things will be like a couple of years from now when this whole
discussion has been forgotten?

I note in passing that all this has been said in previous messages. The only
thing new here is the fact that I-D templates are now being constructed
containing boilerplate IANA considerations sections, just as I predicted.

				Ned

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf