Subject: Re: WGLC Announcement for draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08 - 26th November2010

From: "t.petch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:09:47 +0100

I do not support publication.

I commented earlier that

"I have a problem with this I-D in that it would appear to make no
distinction between allocation and assignment, and would seem to
include registration in the mix as well, at least at times, while hinting that
whatever these may be, ownership is something else. In the limited context of
transport
identifiers, this may not cause confusion but in closely allied registries,
allocation and assignment are fundamentally different processes and those who
interchange the two are confused and cause confusion."

and I still regard that as a show stopper.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gorry Fairhurst" <[email-masked]>
To: "tsvwg list" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 8:59 AM
Subject: WGLC Announcement for draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08 - 26th
November2010

> This email announces the beginning of a working group last call for
> draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08, "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
> (IANA) Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and Transport
> Protocol Port Number Registry". This document is now thought to be ready
> to proceed to be published as a BCP. Please send any comments to the
> TSVWG list.
>
> The draft is available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08
>
> The document will be forwarded in parallel to the Apps Area for review.
>
> The last call will run for FOUR weeks, ending Friday, 26th November 2010
> (this LC period will cover an IETF meeting).
>
> Emails saying "I support" or "I don't support" publication are also most
> helpful in judging the WG consensus.
>
> James and Gorry
> (TSVWG Chairs)
>
>
>
>

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:46:40 +0100

Hi Tom,

Apparently your comment from January about the mix of terms was missed
and not addressed.

If I understand the English terms correctly, what we are describing that
IANA should do is Allocation, i.e. set aside identifiers for particular
usages. We are not giving over the number space to the ones that
request, thus Assignment would be wrong?

I think we can mostly eliminate one of the terms assignment and
allocation. I think we will have more difficult to get rid of
registration. My personal thinking on this is at least the following
relationship between the terms: A Registrant performs a Registration
(process or request) so that IANA can perform an Allocation of a service
name and possibly ports.

I think we will run into issues with some of our references that might
have had similar confusion between allocation and assignment.

But from my perspective, I think this is a valid comment and should be
addressed.

Cheers

Magnus

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "t.petch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:47:58 +0100

----- Original Message -----
From: "Magnus Westerlund" <[email-masked]>
To: "t.petch" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "tsvwg list" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 1:46 PM

Magnus

That would address my concern. As you say, assign has more of an overtone
of a legal transfer of ownership, which allocate does not (even if my dictionary
defines allocate as assign:-(  There is a lot of assignation in the current I-D
but
I think that most of it should be changed.

I like too the idea that registration is the request, and that IANA allocates,
and
again, there is a lot of registration and I think that most of it should be
changed.

It is unfortunate that the end result of an allocation by IANA is a registry but
I
do not think that that can be helped:-(   Whatever terminology we agree on,
I think that the I-D should spell it out early on.

I did scan a variety of I-Ds with IANA actions and see IANA allocating,
registering
and assigning values in registries, with perhaps the last as the most common,
but that does
not make it the right choice for me.

Tom Petch