Re: [eppext] moving documents along

[Michael Holloway <[e-mail]>]

2. draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02 : I am happy to stamp a "no objection" on 
this one.

3. draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase-02 : The discussions are ongoing, 
hopefully we are close.

5. draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-smd-00 : To me this document seems to be ready 
as is, and as it has implemented by TMCH and LaunchPhase extension as 
see no reason not to push it forward.

I am afraid I have no comments on 1. eppext-reg and 4. eppext-keyrelay 
have not really been following these.

regards,
Michael


*Michael Holloway
Senior Systems Administrator**| Com Laude*
E: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
D: [phone]



On 01/21/2015 04:39 PM, James Galvin wrote:
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> EppExt mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eppext