Re: [Crisp] Review of draft-ietf-crisp-iris-dreg2-00

On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 01:59:08PM -0500, Andrew Newton wrote:

> indicate if an update is in dispute.  Were you thinking more along  
> the lines of disputed transfers?  I think that makes sense.  And I  

Yes, exactly.  It'd be nice to be able to tag such disputes, because
there's now at least one policy around tracking them, &c. (and it
seems to me that it'd be great to be able to capture as much state as
possible through these queries).  I don't feel strongly about it, but
if it isn't too much work to do, it seems worthwhile.

> I think the granular approach is better.  Still, it wouldn't hurt if  
> we all took a look at that EPP draft.  What is the name and the  
> status of the document?

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-rfc3730bis-01.txt

I believe there's one for 3730, 3731, 3732, 3733, and 3734 (that's
all the I-D tracker turns up for me, anyway), so just substitute the
target RFC number in the URL above.

There are also two current I-Ds from the .br operators for extensions
to the domain and contact objects.  These are extensions that I
_think_ are compatible with the dreg2 draft, but maybe someone who is
better versed than I in both should have a look:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-neves-epp-brdomain-01.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-neves-epp-brorg-01.txt

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@ca.afilias.info>                              M2P 2A8
                                        +1 416 646 3304 x4110

_______________________________________________
Crisp mailing list
Crisp@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/crisp