Re: agent draft updated

[tom petch <ietfc%btconnect.com@localhost>]

________________________________________
From: ietf-ssh-owner%NetBSD.org@localhost <ietf-ssh-owner%NetBSD.org@localhost> on behalf of Damien Miller <djm%mindrot.org@localhost>
Sent: 23 August 2023 06:45
To: Jeffrey Hutzelman
Cc: Simon Tatham; ietf-ssh
Subject: Re: agent draft updated


On Tue, 22 Aug 2023, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:

> Indeed, independent submissions cannot normally create new registries.
> That's OK, though, because you don't actually need them. The purpose of the
> independently-submitted information document would be to document the
> existing protocol, both for the benefit of the community already using it
> and as a starting point for standardization work. Such a document can simply
> list the code points already used or reserved (the tables already in your
> draft) and need not actually create any registries. The registry creation
> can wait for publication of the eventual IETF-stream document.

Ok, I've uploaded a version without the new IANA registries.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-miller-ssh-agent-10

I assume it's okay to request new entries in existing registries?
(This draft does)

<tp>
It depends and here it is not.

The registry is defined as what is now known as Expert Review in the RFC that created the registry RFC8308  and that is explained in RFC8126 as
  (Formerly called "IETF Consensus" in the first edition of this
   document.)  With the IETF Review policy, new values are assigned only
   through RFCs in the IETF Stream -- those that have been shepherded
   through the IESG as AD-Sponsored or IETF working group documents

So it must be an IETF WG document or AD-sponsored.  If the policy were Expert Review or RFC Required you would be ok but you are not.  And changing the policy cannot be done , that would likely require Standards Track.

Tom Petch

Thanks,
Damien