RFC 7134 PROPOSED STANDARD SIP · IANA REGISTRY

The Management Policy of the Resource Priority Header (RPH) Registry Changed to "IETF Review"

Makes it easier to register new Resource-Priority namespaces by switching to IETF Review.

On rfc-editor.org ↗
PUBLISHED
March 2014
AUTHORS
B. Rosen
STREAM
IETF
BUILDS ON
RFC 4412 — SIP Resource-Priority
OLD POLICY
Standards Action
NEW POLICY
IETF Review
DOI
10.17487/RFC7134

RFC text

Contents
Original text · RFC Editor View on rfc-editor.org ↗
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          B. Rosen
Request for Comments: 7134                                       NeuStar
Updates: 4412                                                 March 2014
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721


  The Management Policy of the Resource Priority Header (RPH) Registry
                        Changed to "IETF Review"

Abstract

   RFC 4412 defines the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" and "Resource-
   Priority Priority-values" registries.  The management policy of these
   registries is "Standards Action".  This document normatively updates
   RFC 4412 to change the management policy of these registries to "IETF
   Review".

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7134.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

1.  Introduction

   [RFC4412] defines the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" and "Resource-
   Priority Priority-values" registries.  The management policy of these
   registries is "Standards Action" [RFC5226].  Experience suggests that
   a document that only defines a new namespace with its priorities, and
   does not create new protocol semantics, should not be a Standards-
   Track document.  Therefore, this document updates [RFC4412] to change
   the management policy of the registries to "IETF Review".

2.  Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce any security considerations beyond
   those discussed in [RFC4412].

3.  IANA Considerations

   IANA has changed the management policy of the "Resource-Priority
   Namespaces" and "Resource-Priority Priority-values" registries to
   "IETF Review" [RFC5226].

4.  Normative References

   [RFC4412]  Schulzrinne, H. and J. Polk, "Communications Resource
              Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC
              4412, February 2006.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.

Author's Address

   Brian Rosen
   NeuStar
   470 Conrad Dr.
   Mars, PA  16046
   US

   Phone: +1 724 382 1051
   EMail: br@brianrosen.net

AI ELI5

On this page
PROBLEMThe Resource-Priority registries required Standards Action, which forced a Standards Track document even for a new namespace that adds no protocol semantics.
MECHANISMThe management policy of the Resource-Priority Namespaces and Priority-values registries changes to IETF Review.
WHY IT MATTERSA document that only defines a namespace and its priorities no longer has to be Standards Track.

§1Introduction

RFC 4412 defines the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" and "Resource-Priority Priority-values" registries, managed under "Standards Action". Experience suggests that a document that only defines a new namespace with its priorities, and creates no new protocol semantics, should not be a Standards Track document.

The rules for adding to the list were stricter than they needed to be.

§1The Policy Change

This document updates RFC 4412 to change the management policy of both registries to "IETF Review" (RFC 5226).

IANA has made that change to the "Resource-Priority Namespaces" and "Resource-Priority Priority-values" registries.

Now the rule for adding to the list is a little looser.

§2Security Considerations

This document does not introduce any security considerations beyond those discussed in RFC 4412.

Nothing new is risky, because only the paperwork rule changed.

§4References