[eppext] moving documents along

[James Galvin <[e-mail]>]

Speaking as Chair, I want to bring folks up to date on where I believe 
we are.  Please do speak up if you disagree or have any corrections.

We have 5 documents in our working group.


1. draft-ietf-eppext-reg-10 Extension Registry for the Extensible 
Provisioning Protocol

If you've been tracking the status updates from the RFC Editor on the 
list then you know this document is close to publication as an RFC. 
Scott Hollenbeck has been doing his part to move this along.  There is 
no action for the working group at this time.


2. draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02 Internationalized Domain Name Mapping 
Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)	

There has been very little discussion on the mailing list about this 
document.  Andrew Sullivan posted some extensive comments to which there 
has been limited response.

It's tough to declare consensus with so little discussion.  It would be 
helpful if folks would review the document and comments and post at 
least a "no objection".


3. draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay-01	 Relay Extension for the Extensible 
Provisioning Protocol

There has been lively discussion here and we appear to have a difference 
of opinion on a technical point.  We very much need to hear from other 
folks.  Please review the thread and let everyone know what you think.


4. draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase-02 Launch Phase Mapping for the 
Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)

I believe we're close to consensus on this document.  There's been some 
discussion but nothing too contentious as far as I can see.  I'm 
expecting Jim Gould to submit a revised document in the not too distant 
future and we'll review where we are at that time.


5. draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-smd-00 Mark and Signed Mark Objects Mapping

This document has expired and is waiting for the author to resubmit. 
There was one change proposed on the mailing list last year that needs 
to be incorporated in the revision.

At one time there was concern about the relationship between this 
document and the launchphase document but I don't believe that concern 
exists any more.

I suppose it's fair to ask if the working group is still interested in 
publishing this document.  If so, I'll press Gustavo to submit a revised 
document and we can review where we are at that time.


Comments and corrections are welcome!

Jim