[Standards] XMPP Registrar: Registration policy

Sam Whited sam at samwhited.com
Tue Jan 3 14:56:36 UTC 2017

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> Couldn't we do that through a PR against XEP-0045 and review by the
> appropriate parties, such as the author and (given that it's Draft) the
> Council?

That's what happened, it was vetoed, if I recall correctly.

> You might be catching on to the fact that, having experienced more
> heavyweight standards processes (mostly IETF) up close for many years, I'm
> leery of adding more weight than necessary to ours... ;-)

I think the point of having a registration policy isn't to add more
weight or make any process longer, but just to clarify when normative
text is needed and when it's not. Would setting a default of
"first-come-first-serve" be okay (then for just the registries we
think need a normative description of the things in them we could add
another policy)?


Sam Whited
pub 4096R/54083AE104EA7AD3

More information about the Standards mailing list