[Register-URN] Adding a NAPTR record to the urn.arpa domain

[Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)]

Hi everyone,

I want to back up a little bit on this document because I think there is 
confusion that needs to be addressed before we continue. I would like to 
understand the difference between URN.ARPA and URN.URI.ARPA, and why 
there needs to be two registrations. Wouldn't that actually hurt 
interoperability?

I would also like to confirm that there is no URI registration process 
needed for this document.  This doesn't mean that I don't take Ted's and 
Leslie's comments seriously.  Indeed I will ask them for all of their 
review comments, because they can further improve this work.

Eliot

On 16.01.2024 07:29, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Hi SM,
>
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 2:47 AM S Moonesamy <sm+ietf at elandsys.com 
> <mailto:sm%2Bietf at elandsys.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Francesca, Murray,
>
>     [Cc to Document Shepherd]
>
>     Please see the request quoted below.
>
>     Barry is listed as RAD for
>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/
>
>     I was a bit puzzled as I was unsure whether he was an AD or
>     not.  Anyway, one of you may be able to figure out whether there is
>     any action required from the IESG's end as per RFC 8141.
>
>
> It looks like Barry is listed because at one point this was being 
> handled by the IESG, but it looks like that's no longer the case and 
> it's now being handled by the ISE. Barry's name is on there for legacy 
> reasons.
>
> In any event, RFC 8141 doesn't seem to mention anything about 
> URN.ARPA, so it looks like RFC 3405 (BCP 65) is the governing 
> document.  Section 3.2.1 of that document states:
>     The registration of a NAPTR record for a URN NID MUST NOT precede
>     proper registration of that NID and publication of a stable
>     specification in accordance with [9  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3405.html#ref-9>]
> However, draft-spinosa-urn-lex has not been published yet. Is this 
> request premature, in the sense that the referenced draft is not 
> stable (e.g., it could expire)?  Should we wait until it's an RFC?
>
> It doesn't look to me like the IESG has to direct IANA to do 
> anything.  The BCP suggests that such registration is automatic once 
> the NID is registered.  Have you contacted IANA to ask them to make 
> the registration?  They might also be waiting for the RFC to be published.
>
> -MSK
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/register-urn/attachments/20240116/a3feeefc/attachment.html>