Subject: [Ietf-calsify] Issue 19: IANA considerations for RFC2445bis

From: lear at cisco.com (Eliot Lear)
Date: Mon Sep 25 06:02:44 2006

[Chair hat off again]

All,

Our charter calls for us to clarify IANA considerations for new
components / tokens.  In my opinion interoperability demands that new
components be documented.  My preference is by RFC.  A procedure,
however, for the content of the RFC would smooth things along.  How
would people like to proceed?  Think about how DHCP options are handled,
for instance.  There's a template and people use it, and eventually an
option is assigned by IANA.

In case you're wondering just how this relates to the price of tea in
China, at the last Calconnect (as opposed to the one going on now),
there was a proposal to include some sort of venue information, like
telephone number or number of seats or the like.  Having something along
these lines would be useful.  There's a lot of meta information out
there about things like meeting rooms that we don't want to duplicate
from people's LDAP directories, of course.  But the common example of
this might be telephone information relating to conferencing.

We don't want to make additions like this too difficult, but I think
they should still be subject to some sort of review.

Now, from my reading of the current draft the only thing that IANA needs
to keep track of is iana-token.  Is that correct?  If so, I propose the
following text:

The IANA is requested to maintain a database of tokens.  Each token
should be associated with an RFC that has undergone review by the IETF. 
Each such RFC shall make use of the following template to register tokens:

1.  Token Name
2.  Context in which the token is valid (vevent / vprop / vtodo / ... )
3.  ABNF description of the token, using the context of this memo
4.  How many of these may appear in one context?
5.  Semantic specification of the token or a reference thereto.

(Contrived) Example:

1.  Token Name: VENUE
2.  Valid Context: VEVENT
3.  ABNF: 

venui = "VENUE" ":" 1*( rconfinfo /  confroominfo )
rconfinfo =  "REMOTE" ( "/" ( vconfurl ) / ( confnum  ["+" confpass] ))
...

Comments?

Eliot

---

From: alexey.melnikov at isode.com (Alexey Melnikov)
Date: Mon Sep 25 09:08:22 2006

>should be associated with an RFC that has undergone review by the IETF. 
If this procedure is not to be enforced on vendor specific tokens, than 
this is Ok.
(Your template looks fine.)