Skip to main content

Initial Language Subtag Registry
RFC 4645

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
06 (System) Notify list changed from randy_presuhn@mindspring.com, duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp to (None)
2012-08-22
06 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Bill Fenner
2006-09-11
06 (System) This was part of a ballot set with: draft-ietf-ltru-registry
2006-09-11
06 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza
2006-09-11
06 Amy Vezza [Note]: 'RFC 4645' added by Amy Vezza
2006-09-08
06 (System) RFC published
2005-11-22
06 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2005-11-15
06 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2005-11-15
06 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2005-11-15
06 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2005-11-14
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::Point Raised - writeup needed by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-11-06
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation::External Party by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-10-31
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to IESG Evaluation::External Party from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-10-20
06 Bill Fenner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Bill Fenner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Bill Fenner
2005-10-19
06 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2005-10-19
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-06.txt
2005-10-14
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-10-14
06 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2005-10-13
2005-10-13
06 Bert Wijnen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen by Bert Wijnen
2005-10-13
06 Mark Townsley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mark Townsley by Mark Townsley
2005-10-13
06 David Kessens [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens
2005-10-13
06 Margaret Cullen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman by Margaret Wasserman
2005-10-13
06 Michelle Cotton IANA Comments:
We understand this document to contain the initial registrations for the Language Subtag registry.
2005-10-12
06 Bill Fenner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Bill Fenner has been changed to Discuss from No Objection by Bill Fenner
2005-10-12
06 Bill Fenner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner
2005-10-12
06 Jon Peterson [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jon Peterson by Jon Peterson
2005-10-12
06 Sam Hartman [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sam Hartman by Sam Hartman
2005-10-12
06 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley
2005-10-11
06 Brian Carpenter [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Carpenter by Brian Carpenter
2005-10-07
06 Ted Hardie [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ted Hardie by Ted Hardie
2005-10-05
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::AD Followup by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-09-29
06 Scott Hollenbeck [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck
2005-09-29
06 Scott Hollenbeck Ballot has been issued by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-09-29
06 Scott Hollenbeck Created "Approve" ballot
2005-09-29
06 Scott Hollenbeck Placed on agenda for telechat - 2005-10-13 by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-09-26
06 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2005-09-26
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-05.txt
2005-09-14
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised ID Needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-09-06
06 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system
2005-08-23
06 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2005-08-23
06 Amy Vezza State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza
2005-08-23
06 Scott Hollenbeck Last Call was requested by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-08-23
06 Scott Hollenbeck State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-08-23
06 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2005-08-23
06 (System) Last call text was added
2005-08-23
06 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2005-08-23
06 Scott Hollenbeck Merged with draft-ietf-ltru-registry by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-08-18
06 Scott Hollenbeck
Shepherd write-up:

1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready …
Shepherd write-up:

1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready
to forward to the IESG for publication?

Yes.

1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members
and key non-WG members?  Do you have any concerns about the
depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed?

The document has been reviewed by several WG members.  We have requested
reviews from several WG non-members, but have not gotten any responses.
We are not concerned about the depth or breadth of the reviews performed.

1.c) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a
particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational
complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)?

No.

1.d) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of?  For
example, perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the
document, or have concerns whether there really is a need for
it.  In any event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG
and the WG has indicated it that it still wishes to advance the
document, detail those concerns in the write-up.

No.

1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it
represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with
others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and
agree with it?

Strong consensus of the active participants; have not seen any opposition
to this document.  However, see answers for closely related registry draft.

1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme
discontent?  If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in
separate email to the Responsible Area Director.

No.  However, see answers for the closely related registry draft.

1.g) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the
ID nits? (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html).

Yes.

1.h) Is the document split into normative and informative references?

Yes.

Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not
also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state?

No.
2005-08-18
06 Scott Hollenbeck Draft Added by Scott Hollenbeck in state Publication Requested
2005-08-18
06 Scott Hollenbeck [Note]: 'Document shepherd is Randy Presuhn ' added by Scott Hollenbeck
2005-08-17
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-04.txt
2005-08-03
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-03.txt
2005-07-13
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-02.txt
2005-07-07
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-01.txt
2005-06-21
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ltru-initial-00.txt