IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [eppext] rechartering

Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl> Wed, 29 July 2015 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>
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 26B531B34D8 for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 01:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.295
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.295 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 F5d4osQPtXbn for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 01:44:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from arn2-kamx.sidn.nl (kamx.sidn.nl [IPv6:2a00:d78:0:147:94:198:152:69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7476A1B34C5 for <eppext@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 01:44:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=sidn.nl; s=sidn-nl; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator:x-originating-ip:content-type:mime-version; bh=LyWud//gdTM+kPwzf5Ka2EuCGARsi2AujChbbXlccwE=; b=IW2g5LZ/KWV9DQtwvtRg3PKlbOpiiMt+6S0x32Z27KDn4cMfBfbU3ZiXC0auELEi5qFBy1JGeYmsUf8kfd/MOPDTWG92gV+r+juTUpr/NtZwJWZmsPl2Z3WkU4oVX67Q1ZnHoCgdvYgvui9l2YYsq/45RdlTk4PMDO0wGgHHS1fzLQERoTE1yqfdHsLJn32715vn6xPG8iyV/Ci/c4MTSSA+VcTsd/muMl14c7YYmjeHrE8quKSq/b8zGOL5Vmfa5KxYBTXHGT+JzR1zwRqIONE2bO6pXgFNYrtiCOcl285j8N6MpRm4FUqb2g6zicBDrN2Veea1Z0VO5teTbU9Y2Q==
Received: from ka-mbx02.SIDN.local ([192.168.2.178]) by arn2-kamx.sidn.nl with ESMTP id t6T8ilV8007782-t6T8ilVA007782 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=CAFAIL); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:44:47 +0200
Received: from KAHUBCASN01.SIDN.local (192.168.2.75) by ka-mbx02.SIDN.local (192.168.2.178) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1076.9; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:44:48 +0200
Received: from KAMBX1.SIDN.local ([fe80::501d:affc:30a9:4edf]) by kahubcasn01 ([192.168.2.73]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:44:45 +0200
From: Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>
To: 'Andrew Newton' <andy@hxr.us>, "eppext@ietf.org" <eppext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [eppext] rechartering
Thread-Index: AQHQyJkQdjJErQqm9UOi5gStcoR0rJ3yITpQ
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:44:45 +0000
Message-ID: <C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768BA20AA85@kambx1.SIDN.local>
References: <CAAQiQRdBDKb8NF+d2COxTVCbx7MMtV4dsTRDSqBotq6XroHxBQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAQiQRdBDKb8NF+d2COxTVCbx7MMtV4dsTRDSqBotq6XroHxBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.171]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768BA20AA85kambx1SIDNlocal_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eppext/nO2god0LVcC0RxXYxu8t-1PcztQ>
Subject: Re: [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: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:44:52 -0000

Hello Andrew and others,

I am not completely convinced it is a good idea, but I do not have any objection to combine the work as the interested people are mostly the same.

The overlap between EPP an RDAP is mainly the data that is send using a different protocol (and a different purpose). Another thing is that I am not aware of any work that is being done for RDAP other than the EPP status mapping draft from James Gould.

But I can imagine there will we work on extensions for RDAP in the future as more parties are going to implement it.

Gr,
Rik


From: EppExt [mailto:eppext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Newton
Sent: maandag 27 juli 2015 20:21
To: eppext@ietf.org
Subject: [eppext] rechartering

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

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status