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

[Jacob Nevins <jacobn+secsh%chiark.greenend.org.uk@localhost>]

Sam Hartman writes:
> 1) RFC 2434 needs to be normative not informative.
> 
> 2) You don't actually manage to describe what fields are in the IANA
>    registry Do you want anything more than the header name and a
>    reference to the document defining the header If not, say that.

I don't think we need anything more than that.

How about these edits, relative to the publickeyfile-12 posted on
this list?:

Section 5 "IANA Considerations":
replace the following text:

   The following header-tags are defined by this document:

      subject

      comment

   In addition, all header-tags beginning with "x-" are reserved for
   Private Use, as defined in [RFC2434].

   Further allocations are to be made by IETF Consensus, as defined in
   [RFC2434].

with:

   IANA is required to create and maintain a registry of these
   header-tags. The registry will map each header-tag to a reference
   defining the header.

   The initial contents of the registry are as follows:

      subject           defined in Section 3.3.1
      comment           defined in Section 3.3.2

   Header-tags beginning with "x-" are reserved for Private Use,
   as defined in [RFC2434].

   All other allocations are to be made by IETF Consensus, as
   defined in [RFC2434].

Move [RFC2434] reference from section 7.2 to 7.1.