Re: [(nowhere)] FW: Please re-review draft-ietf-secsh-publickeyfile [I06-050928-0006]

[Joseph Galbraith <galb-list%vandyke.com@localhost>]

The introduction of the iana section was in
response to a comment by Jacob Nevins with
regards to this section:

3.3.3.  New Headers

   Headers with header-tags beginning with "x-" are considered
   experimental, and may be used without IETF consensus.

   All other headers are reserved for use only by IETF consensus.

Jacob noted in his email:
> Doesn't this imply the existence of an IANA registry, contrary
to what
> section 5 "IANA Considerations" says?

I'll see if I can work on a little bit more for the IANA section
(text welcome if someone knows exactly what details IANA needs.)

Thanks,

Joseph

Sam Hartman wrote:
> 
> Folks, I'm holding a discuss on the ssh publickeyfile draft because  IANA
> doesn't understand what they are supposed to do.
> The IANA change is one I didn't see discussed on the list and it seems to have introduced problems.
> 
> Bill, I assume you can work to resolution on this.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> ([unix socket]) by solipsist-nation (Cyrus
> v2.1.16-IPv6-Debian-2.1.16-10) with LMTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:19:34
> -0500 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Return-Path: <apache%g13.icann.org@localhost>
> Received: from south-station-annex.mit.edu
> (SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.72.1.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher
> DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested)
> by suchdamage.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEE1413105 for
> <hartmans%suchdamage.org@localhost>; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:19:33 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from fort-point-station.mit.edu (FORT-POINT-STATION.MIT.EDU
> [18.7.7.76]) by south-station-annex.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP
> id k1ALJWRj027225 for <hartmans%suchdamage.org@localhost>; Fri, 10 Feb 2006
> 16:19:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from g13.icann.org (g13.icann.org
> [192.0.34.122]) by fort-point-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with
> ESMTP id k1ALJOwA022905 for <hartmans-ietf%mit.edu@localhost>; Fri, 10 Feb 2006
> 16:19:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from g13.icann.org (g13.icann.org
> [127.0.0.1]) by g13.icann.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id
> k1ALJaHL013768 for <hartmans-ietf%mit.edu@localhost>; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:19:36
> -0800 Received: (from apache@localhost) by g13.icann.org
> (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id k1ALJaMx013767; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:19:36
> -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:19:36 -0800 Message-Id:
> <200602102119.k1ALJaMx013767%g13.icann.org@localhost> To: hartmans-ietf%mit.edu@localhost
> Subject: FW: Please re-review draft-ietf-secsh-publickeyfile
> [I06-050928-0006] From: iana-drafts%icann.org@localhost Reply-To:
> iana-drafts%icann.org@localhost Cc: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.42
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on
> solipsist-nation.suchdamage.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No,
> score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no
> version=3.0.2
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> 
> 
> Sam,
> 
> Sorry for the delayed response.
> 
> I have reviewed the new version and have put new comments in the tracker.
> However, the IANA Considerations section still needs work.  There is not much detail regarding what type of registry, are these values, what are the registration procedures, etc.
> 
> If you need for me to look at a new version of the IANA Considerations section, please let me know.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michelle
> IANA
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartmans-ietf%mit.edu@localhost]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:59 PM
> To: iana%iana.org@localhost
> Subject: Please re-review draft-ietf-secsh-publickeyfile
> 
> 
> Hi. the IANA considerations for this draft used to include no actions but
> now includes actions. I'd appreciate it if you would review these actions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
>            
>