Address IANA pre-meeting feedback for IETF 120 RATS session

[aj-stein-nist]

Before the IETF meeting, we check working group agendas for documents with IANA-related issues. We have notes about the current version of this document:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-moriarty-rats-posture-assessment-01

1. Table 4 should also include the registry’s “Claim Value Type” field. See https://www.iana.org/assignments/cwt.

2. The JWT and CWT registrations should also name a change controller. (The IETF is now preferred to the IESG as a change controller for registrations made by IETF-stream documents.) This could be mentioned in a sentence instead of in the tables, if that would be easier.

If you have any questions, just let us know. If you'd like to talk in person, you can find us next to the RFC Editor's table from Monday through Thursday. You can also request another review at any time by contacting us at [email protected].

For more information about IANA Considerations section requirements, please see

https://www.iana.org/help/protocol-registration

[aj-stein-nist]

Actually, having read the very relevant examples in ietf-rats-eat-25 as it is cited in the relevant registry, we need several other fields to make it "IANA-friendly" and ready beyond claim type, more to follow.