IETF Logo Mail Archive

[eppext] rechartering

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Mon, 27 July 2015 18:21 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@hxr.us>
X-Original-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F89A1AC44E for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.078
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gp0FRfT7_0Ts for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com [209.85.212.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F54B1B318F for <eppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibud3 with SMTP id ud3so127628100wib.0 for <eppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:21:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=8O//wCh4vPsljgEEDaVC7PR85dXWjHFB2D7jF23dPbM=; b=NPL+EqV4NiCx/RE432SCGgF5aqL5CUtPnDfOPBpOaAifpJ2sA4XZJQxzUQiiaXl8UV 115kal2oDdyLXJVkiiF25hfecj6w8qj1g38yiPJ2JkxmDZ2SVTJx0IIUHAB0Z0AcWoPA 8OWlJnBi9/Sxw2vcVk03DEbGh5vDpug11vEiP6GcIv0D3VCMPc5oNroHo8iDXF0SVxdP gBwgCcspF60IoG94g/tHiANBvw2J9kr8D7QJkc+g+CZm3dpDGhXmlrHYVXjJwYv3WKcP X3SiZFME3yguRDLcn8r9uMjBbvjLKUGyXMcnNFgQF44FxN+0j8p6qCtoUHey7SYwUDL8 SjqA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnwPz2UdTwCOo6sc+XW/VmMCKibzXSnr9Kwon+T5r+VDxRQjKrnBodY0Fn/zjGGPTu5gqNs
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.10.200 with SMTP id k8mr26702578wib.5.1438021282212; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:21:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.249.99 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:21:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [2001:500:4:15:3859:3212:af1e:35d5]
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 20:21:22 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAQiQRdBDKb8NF+d2COxTVCbx7MMtV4dsTRDSqBotq6XroHxBQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
To: eppext@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c26458b512ed051bdf6bf6
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eppext/iHZGlHC1jxbMTdWgsE2D3pkQaP4>
Subject: [eppext] rechartering
X-BeenThere: eppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <eppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eppext/>
List-Post: <mailto:eppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 18:21:25 -0000

All,

I'd like to offer another idea for the rechartering of this working group.
Instead of focusing exclusively on EPP extensions, would it be better if we
rechartered to focus on protocol issues of Internet registries... more
specifically EPP and RDAP.

Given that the constituencies for both have considerable overlap, and there
is already at least one draft covering the mapping between EPP and RDAP and
that there will likely be future drafts where the inputs of EPP and the
outputs of RDAP are correlated, this seems like an easier way forward.

I spoke privately with Scott, Barry, and Pete (the AD behind the chartering
of both EPPEXT and WEIRDS) just to see if I wasn't barking madd, and they
each thought it makes sense.

What are your thoughts and comments about such an approach?

-andy

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email