Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow provisional registrations for all registries (#3170)

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 15:21:24 -0800

MikeBishop approved this pull request.

Minor nits; otherwise looks good.

> +{{!RFC8126}}.  Designated expert(s) are advised that only registrations for an
+excessive proportion of remaining codepoint space or the very first unassigned
+value (see {{iana-random}}) can be rejected.
+
+Provisional registrations will include a date field that indicates when the
+registration was last updated.  A request to update the date on any provisional
+registration can be made without review from the designated expert(s).
+
+All QUIC registries include the following fields to support provisional
+registration:
+
+Value:
+: The assigned codepoint.
+
+Status:
+: "Permanent" or "Provisional".
 
 Specification:

```suggestion
```
The others here don't have a blank line between them.

> +New uses of codepoints from QUIC registries SHOULD use a randomly selected
+codepoint that excludes both existing allocations and the first unallocated
+codepoint in the selected space.  This minimizes the risk that differing
+semantics are attributed to the same codepoint by different implementations.
+Use of the first codepoint in a range is intended for use by specifications that
+are developed through the standards process {{?STD=RFC2026}} and its allocation
+MUST be negotiated with IANA before use.
+
+For codepoints that are encoded in variable-length integers
+({{integer-encoding}}), such as frame types, codepoints that encode to four or
+eight bytes (that is, values 2^14 and above) SHOULD be used unless the usage is
+especially sensitive to having a longer encoding.
+
+Applications to register codepoints in QUIC registries MAY include a codepoint
+as part of the registration.  IANA MUST allocate the selected codepoint unless
+that codepoint is already assigned or the codepoints is the first unallocated

```suggestion
that codepoint is already assigned or the codepoint is the first unallocated
```

> +
+
+### Reclaiming Provisional Codepoints
+
+A request might be made to remove an unused provisional registration from the
+registry to reclaim space in a registry, or portion of the registry (such as the
+64-16383 range for codepoints that use variable-length encodings).  This SHOULD
+be done only for the codepoints with the earliest recorded date and entries that
+have been updated less than a year prior SHOULD NOT be reclaimed.
+
+A request to remove a codepoint MUST be reviewed by the designated expert(s).
+The expert(s) MUST attempt to determine whether the codepoint is still in use.
+Experts are advised to contact the listed contacts for the registration, plus as
+wide a set of protocol implementers as possible in order to determine whether
+any use of the codepoint is known.  The expert(s) are advised to allow at least
+four weeks for this search.

```suggestion
four weeks for responses.
```

> +the registration is made, the codepoint MUST NOT be reclaimed.  Instead, the
+date on the registration is updated.  A note might be added for the registration
+recording relevant information that was learned.
+
+If no use of the codepoint was identified and no request was made to update the
+registration, the codepoint MAY be removed from the registry.
+
+This process also applies to requests to change a provisional registration into
+a permanent registration, except that the goal is not to determine whether there
+is no use of the codepoint, but to determine that the registration is an
+accurate representation of any deployed usage.
+
+
+### Permanent Registrations {#iana-permanent}
+
+Permanent registrations in QUIC registries require Specification Required policy

```suggestion
Permanent registrations in QUIC registries use the Specification Required policy
```

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170#pullrequestreview-310133400

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 16:11:03 -0800

@martinthomson pushed 1 commit.

09a420387fa4e2ca5562bc58a31806c1c6deff3f  Editorial fixes from @MikeBishop

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170/files/fea8629b7991150a51b86eff18bd302ed633630a..09a420387fa4e2ca5562bc58a31806c1c6deff3f

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 22:02:34 -0800

@martinthomson pushed 2 commits.

1deac80822eb33acb4eb038210994dcc174a07e8  Add default contact details
44a1cd3861501082dc24d09725212c642fae8997  Add HTTP/3 registration updates

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170/files/09a420387fa4e2ca5562bc58a31806c1c6deff3f..44a1cd3861501082dc24d09725212c642fae8997

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:15:42 -0800

MikeBishop requested changes on this pull request.

In lots of places, you reference {{iana-policy}} for things that aren't actually described there -- it just contains a pointer to the QUIC spec for the policy.  It might be better to point directly to the QUIC spec in those places.  (Though given that the section number in QUIC could potentially change, it's also a reasonable argument that we want to have one place to update.)  Just want to make sure that's intentional, rather than a copy-paste of the policy from the QUIC registries.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170#pullrequestreview-312678087

---

From: David Schinazi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:22:44 -0800

DavidSchinazi commented on this pull request.

> +Permanent registrations in QUIC registries require Specification Required policy
+{{!RFC8126}}, unless otherwise specified.  The designated expert(s) verify that
+a specification exists and is readily accessible.  Expert(s) are encouraged to
+be biased towards approving registrations unless they are abusive, frivolous, or
+actively harmful (not merely aesthetically displeasing, or architecturally
+dubious).  The creation of a registry MAY specify additional constraints on
+permanent registrations.
+
+The creation of a registries MAY identify a range of codepoints where
+registrations are governed by a different registration policy.  For instance,
+the registries for 62-bit codepoints in this document have stricted policies for
+codepoints in the range from 0 to 63.
+
+Any stricter requirements for permanent registrations do not prevent provisional
+registrations for affected codepoints.  For instance, a provisional registration
+for a frame type {{iana-frames}} of 61 could be requested.

I fear that ejecting won't always be possible if the provisional code point is widely used. I think disallowing provisional for [0, 63] might be best.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170#discussion_r343281425

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 15:14:10 -0800

martinthomson commented on this pull request.

We're talking about abuse now.  Those same people could just deploy in this space without creating a registration.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170#discussion_r343377915

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 15:15:00 -0800

I did that intentionally, mostly just to avoid the wordy reference.  I'm happy to defer to you on that.  (Julian can say "told you so" again if he likes :)

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170#issuecomment-550544414

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:24:38 -0800

e4b5c8103a85a79e62da4b027b199b84240bfb24  Allow ranges

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3170/files/44a1cd3861501082dc24d09725212c642fae8997..e4b5c8103a85a79e62da4b027b199b84240bfb24