[Crisp] new status for DREG2

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Tue, 21 March 2006 15:16 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FLiag-0007vA-Ez; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:16:10 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FLiaf-0007v5-FR for crisp@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:16:09 -0500
Received: from zeke.ecotroph.net ([69.31.8.124]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FLiae-0003N8-9u for crisp@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:16:09 -0500
Received: from [130.129.130.179] ([::ffff:130.129.130.179]) (AUTH: PLAIN anewton, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,RC4-SHA) by zeke.ecotroph.net with esmtp; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:15:15 -0500 id 01584379.44201883.00004CED
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <6CEB55DE-2DD5-463B-BE15-145B241D8DCF@hxr.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
To: crisp@ietf.org
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:16:07 -0500
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25
Subject: [Crisp] new status for DREG2
X-BeenThere: crisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Cross Registry Information Service Protocol <crisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/crisp>, <mailto:crisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:crisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:crisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/crisp>, <mailto:crisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: crisp-bounces@ietf.org

I had a meeting with an sTLD operator last week where it was brought  
to my attention that they would like to mark domains with a status  
indicating compliance with regulations not directly related to the  
actual domain registration process... as in, they have conducted a  
compliance check and have found that a domain holder's web site meets  
certain accessibility requirements or internationalization  
requirements, etc...

To do what they would like, I think we should add a <compliant:> and  
<noncompliant> enhanced status to the base enhanced status set in  
DREG2.  The substatus and related authority would indicate the type  
of compliance.

Any comments?

-andy 

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