Re: Starting the ietf-xml-mime mailing list

[Ned Freed <Ned.Freed@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > > Each application will be documented by some RFC.
> >
> > This isn't true. The standards say that RFC documentation is only required for
> > registration in the IETF tree, and in practice none of the many registered
> > XML-based types have been backed up with RFCs.

> I will revise the summary accordingly.  Registration in the IETF tree and
> that in the vendor tree are quite different.

Moreover, relatively few types belong in the IETF tree.

> > > Each specialized application will require a new subtype registration,
> > > which takes a lot of time and therefore can have long delays.
> >
> > This isn't true. Registrations now routinely take only a few days if
> > they don't contain egregious errors. And we've been known to get them done
> > in less than a day in some cases.

> Is this in the vendor tree?

The registration process is the same (i.e. fast) in *any* tree that
currently exists. The slowness associated with the IETF tree has to do with
RFC review, which is an entirely separate process from type registration.

The only case where I could imagine the registration process being slow is if
we delegate registration trees to some other organization that doesn't do it as
quickly as we do. However, thus far no such delegation has taken place, so this
is an entirely academic point.

				Ned