ietf-nntp IANA extension registry (was: Commetns on draft-15.pdf)

[Russ Allbery]

Charles Lindsey <chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:

> P58. S12 (Extensions)

> We allow IANA registration of extensions defined in standards-track and
> experimental RFCs. Should we also allow "provisional registration" (with
> six months validity, say) for proposed extensions (with safeguards, such
> as existence of an ietf draft and/or approval from an Area
> Director). That might reduce the number of occasions when we are
> contronted with a widely used command such as XOVER, and are forced to
> redefine it as OVER before we can standardize it. I believe there are
> precedents for provisional IANA registrations (for port number, for
> example).

I think this may be a good idea, but I don't know enough about the IANA
registration process.  I think we need a consult with an AD on this point,
unless someone else in the WG knows something more about how this normally
works.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>