Registration Policies for the IETF and IANA
draft-klensin-iana-reg-policy-01

Abstract

For many years, the IETF has maintained, via the IANA, registries of protocol and parameter names and numbers. The primary purpose of these registries is to ensure that different methods and options are properly identified and distinguished. Registration of such names or numbers generally does not necessarily imply approval of the technology in the corresponding protocol. Instead, registration represents the desire to keep choices distinctly identified, separated, and public to avoid conflicts in use. In recent years, various changes in the nature of the instructions given to the IANA, increased perceptions of scarcity in the number spaces associated with some of the parameters, and other issues have led to a shift in emphasis from "registration to keep identifiers unique" toward evaluations of the quality of proposals for and preferences among protocols. This document argues that shift is undesirable. It articulates and clarifies the principles that the reasons for evaluation of registration requests is to ensure a minimum quality of definition, that any assertions of scarcity to restrict registrations must be accompanied by a plan for evaluating and, if appropriate, eliminating the scarcity problem, and that, if a "no scarcity" plan is not possible, to establish criteria for making decisions that are as specific and objective as possible. This document is intended to update the general considerations of RFC 2434, the specific allocation rules of RFC 2780, and the evaluation criteria associated with other documents that condition an IANA registration on Expert Review with IESG oversight or on IESG or IETF action.

Authors

Dr. John C. Klensin

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)