idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits57722/draft-leiba-netmod-regpolicy-update-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (October 12, 2015) is 2412 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Best Current Practice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group B. Leiba 3 Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies 4 Intended status: Best Current Practice October 12, 2015 5 Expires: April 12, 2016 7 Changing the Registration Policy for the NETCONF Capability URNs 8 Registry 9 draft-leiba-netmod-regpolicy-update-00 11 Abstract 13 The registration policy for the Network Configuration Protocol 14 (NETCONF) Capability URNs registry, set up by RFC 6241, has turned 15 out to be unnecessarily strict. This document changes that 16 registration policy to "IETF Review", allowing registrations from 17 certain well reviewed Experimental RFCs, in addition to Standards 18 Track RFCs. 20 Status of this Memo 22 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 23 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 25 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 26 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 27 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 28 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 30 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 31 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 32 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 33 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 35 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 12, 2016. 37 Copyright Notice 39 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 40 document authors. All rights reserved. 42 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 43 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/ 44 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 45 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 46 and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components 47 extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text 48 as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are 49 provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 51 1. Introduction 52 The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) Capability URNs registry 53 [RFC6241], was set up with a registration policy of "Standards 54 Action" [RFC5226], allowing registrations only from Standards Track 55 RFCs. This provided thorough review of the specifications that are 56 requesting NETCONF Capability URNs. It has turned out to be 57 desirable to allocate capability URNs for certain Experimental RFCs 58 also, provided those specifications are also carefully reviewed. The 59 existing registration policy is, therefore, unnecessarily strict, 60 requiring exception handling by the IESG. This document changes that 61 registration policy to "IETF Review", which also allows registrations 62 from certain well reviewed Experimental RFCs. 64 2. IANA Considerations 66 IANA is asked to change the registration policy for the Network 67 Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) Capability URNs registry to "IETF 68 Review", and to add this document to the registry's reference field. 70 Registrations made from RFCs that are not on the Standards Track need 71 to be carefully reviewed through IETF Last Call and consultation with 72 relevant working groups, such as NETCONF. The Operations and 73 Management Area Directors should confirm the appropriate level of 74 review during IESG Evaluation. 76 3. Security Considerations 78 This document is purely procedural, and there are no related security 79 considerations. 81 4. References 83 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 84 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 85 May 2008. 87 [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J.Ed., 88 and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol 89 (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, 90 . 92 Author's Address 94 Barry Leiba 95 Huawei Technologies 97 Phone: +1 646 827 0648 98 Email: barryleiba@computer.org 99 URI: http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/