Change:
IANA has created a new registry titled "EDHOC Exporter Label" under the new group name "Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman Over COSE (EDHOC)".  The registration procedure is "Expert Review".  The columns of the <del> registry are Label, and Description.  Label is a uint.  Description is a text string.  The initial contents of the registry are: </del> <ins> registry are Label and Description.  Label is a uint.  Description is a text string.  The initial contents of the registry are: </ins> 9.2. IANA has created a new registry titled "EDHOC Cipher Suites" under the new group name "Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman Over COSE (EDHOC)".  The registration procedure is "Expert Review".  The columns of the <del> registry are Value, Array, Description, and Reference, where Value is an integer and the other columns are text strings.  The initial contents of the registry are: </del> <ins> registry are Value, Array and Description, where Value is an integer and the other columns are text strings.  The initial contents of the registry are: </ins> 9.3. IANA has created a new registry entitled "EDHOC Method Type" under the new group name "Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman Over COSE (EDHOC)".  The <del> registration procedure is "Expert Review".  The columns of the registry are Value, Description, and Reference, where Value is an integer and the other columns are text strings.  The initial contents of the registry are shown in fig-method-types. </del> <ins> registration procedure is "Specification Required".  The columns of the registry are Value, Initiator Authentication Key, and Responder Authentication Key, where Value is an integer and the other columns are text strings describing the authentication keys.  The initial contents of the registry are shown in fig-method-types. </ins> 9.4.

Discussion:
I am against adding a stupid reference column.
NAME Noted. Is the rest OK?
Currently a mixture of: The registration procedure is "Expert Review". The registration procedure is "Specification Required".
I changed EDHOC Error Code Registry to "Expert Review" to align with the others. It makes no sense that the Error registry has harder requirements than the methods or cipher suite registry, We should maybe discuss Registration procedures for the new EDHOC registries at IETF 112. Right now they are all expert review without any differentiation between small and big numbers. We should discuss what is the right approach.
The registries was aligned in -12 and the topic was discussed at the Oct 5 interim without any suggestions for change. The expert instructions seem to cover all the aspects discussed during the interim
Reopen based on the comment by Kathleen. At least new EDHOC method types would typically require specification.
Makes sense to me
Was is the status of this? This should be quick and easy to fix and close.
The plan is to update Section 9.4 and replace "Expert Review" with "Specification Required". I noted now that in that section the columns of the registry are: but the table with the referred initial contents (Figure 4) has columns:
It should be 9.4 I think "Value, Description, and Reference" is correct, but just referencing Figure 4 does not work.
We may need two tables. Figure 4 doesn't need to have a Reference column. We can make another table in 9.4 with "Value, Description, and Reference", where Description is "Initiator and Responder uses signature key for authentication" etc.
A reference column is never needed. I would suggest to remove it from all the Tables in Section 9. That column is needed on the IANA homepage but does not help anybody in the EDHOC specification. IANA is smart enough to use the correct reference without us giving them a column.
Maybe Description should be separated into Initiator Authentication Key, Responder Authentication Key,
The comments above about section 9.4 refers to 9.3 [EDHOC Method Type Registry] in the current master branch.
An attempt to address all comments in PR . I kept the column for References for the registries where a specification is required, method (9.3) and EAD (9.5).
References column removed also in cases where spec. is required in , which is now merged.