RFC Errata
RFC 5226, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", May 2008
Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 8126
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: gen
Errata ID: 2684
Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Julian Reschke
Date Reported: 2011-01-13
Rejected by: Russ Housley
Date Rejected: 2011-12-08
Section 4.2 says:
5) Initial assignments and reservations. Clear instructions should be provided to identify any initial assignments or registrations. In addition, any ranges that are to be reserved for "Private Use", "Reserved", "Unassigned", etc. should be clearly indicated.
It should say:
5) Initial assignments and reservations. Clear instructions should be provided to identify any initial assignments or registrations. In addition, any ranges that are to be reserved for "Private Use", "Reserved", etc. should be clearly indicated.
Notes:
Unassigned values are not "reserved". For bounded registries, they can be computed from the assigned/reserved values. For unbounded registries (think media types), mentioning them doesn't make any sense at all.
--VERIFIER NOTES--
No change is needed. The use of "should" provides any necessary flexibility. In the IANA Considerations section of a document that sets up a registry, authors tend to indicate which values are initially "Unassigned".