Subject: [Enum] Last Call: draft-ietf-enum-iax (IANA Registration for IAX Enumservice) to Proposed Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 07:27:59 -0700 (PDT)

The IESG has received a request from the Telephone Number Mapping WG 
(enum) to consider the following document:

- 'IANA Registration for IAX Enumservice '
   <draft-ietf-enum-iax-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to the
[email-masked] mailing lists by 2009-06-09. Exceptionally, 
comments may be sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please 
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-iax-05.txt

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=14273&rfc_flag=0

---

From: Peter Koch <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 18:56:52 +0200

> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-iax-05.txt

the primary reason why this draft is aiming at Proposed Standard is that
the current regime as of RFC 3761 sets this threshold (or Experimental or BCP)
for ENUM service registration.
However, the draft has a normative reference to draft-guy-iax-05.txt,
aiming at Informational (NIT: the draft itself mentions Informational, too).
I've raised this in previous WG discussions.  Either a downref exemption
is requested - then it needs to be mentioned - or draft-guy-iax-05.txt
is expected to go to Standards Track and the ENUM service registration
has to wait.  Since draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide-16.txt is now
in Last Call, and provided it gets approved, it might just be easier to
withdraw the LC for the iax ENUM service and instead process it under the new
rules of Expert Review.
That also means there's little reason for said downref exemption.

NIT: the NAPTR representations should really use standard DNS parentheses
   for line continuation instead of "\".

-Peter