metasystema.org
UpdatedBEST CURRENT PRACTICEIETF streamBCP26

RFC 8126: Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs

Still current, but amended. Parts of this document are changed or extended by RFC 9907. Read both.

In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC

Many protocols make use of points of extensibility that use constants to identify various protocol parameters. To ensure that the values in these fields do not have conflicting uses and to promote interoperability, their allocations are often coordinated by a central record keeper. For IETF protocols, that role is filled by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). To make assignments in a given registry prudently, guidance describing the conditions under which new values should be assigned, as well as when and how modifications to existing values can be made, is needed. This document defines a framework for the documentation of these guidelines by specification authors, in order to assure that the provided guidance for the IANA Considerations is clear and addresses the various issues that are likely in the operation of a registry. This is the third edition of this document; it obsoletes RFC 5226.

Document record

Document ID
RFC8126
Published
June 2017
Authors
M. Cotton; B. Leiba; T. Narten
Status
BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
Stream
IETF
Area
—
Pages
47
Also known as
BCP26
Obsoletes:
RFC 5226
Updated by:
RFC 9907

Topics

Standards lineage

This document is one revision in a chain of 3 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.

  1. RFC 2434 (1998)
  2. RFC 5226 (2008)
  3. RFC 8126 (2017)

Read the full history of Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs →

Referenced by

One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.

Related documents

Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.

Also filed under

About this page

The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.

Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.

Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?

canonical URL: /rfc/8126-guidelines-for-writing-an-iana-considerations-section-in-rfcs