Re: [eppext] WG Last Call - final charter

"James Galvin" <> Tue, 26 January 2016 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812751B2A8B for <>; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:55:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZuVW53_6dQ7U for <>; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:55:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CAF11B2A72 for <>; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:55:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id l65so107440133wmf.1 for <>; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:55:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BdvJdxhAcRQJ/qzMBo/EDzjU8O+RZZpxgi9Fp+AUlUc=; b=h0MajAunEIkf6DaZSzT/Qw0NWfX3EQZUPQAz+U6bOpSOeU1scZTmzg5pOjX/ODFtsG k9KKm3I21QntqVC4BHIkMwGmpOBB9FBiNS8UWNZdMeGSc09BZSQCLGI/prh+0vMv2sWR 2ZdwceQTwTEz71ly28t/oIH+zFYzd9eGf5NYhMoA+AqU5W/aUhYB9+E3dYiNyaH1IxZP mwrBoQ9QL9XMdFJZPiMWX0ZEeyv3p94I50Tdr2iil/eKWBapcszzucf/MvAeFEvHwHTN xRQkPxQaIvur8uVgvcy0wC6iHQw7JgyqbAol3VrdaEoBqpGPcbwShvIueU+VS0SnJZdW kCJw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BdvJdxhAcRQJ/qzMBo/EDzjU8O+RZZpxgi9Fp+AUlUc=; b=E8NCT+xkM5CwFnb3UnkFI3EhmfK2KH06mSHukP3vjoWpSGvxaFVANq9pNTcDpK8C9i PRaYU8llWWEytdZjyUXlmx/RsCqwvjfXiLqhLRmk6SmMjzRQts7h90UTT8bc2vXu697f mTu80YOFMpaJSmMuwk2xBS0C3863PNJsAHmYV1Z5GuRJcN+l9Kg763zRJUF6PSpM8B2H Vqxx2atirgrDU8KAM+QPJKMK1aG8Ma1HVrtxS/kRzmIEkZ32wbaBY7XsR9eoTbcayso8 Z9JmijSNgV4iIKDWIgbPZ/DKwQMCqpPnCbVtPjnB7CqFL+LIYbVXZMEiSXZe4nhoRG0r 0pcQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOT2e0oGpza9zsOg5nnXvxWeTvpjt2vw5rzYox4d/Dw5e4clYBQU9JmK/kwsO87ycA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id kf9mr23728570wjb.122.1453820131029; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:55:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id b127sm3883427wmh.9.2016. (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:55:29 -0800 (PST)
From: James Galvin <>
To: Rik Ribbers <>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:55:27 -0500
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.3r5187)
Archived-At: <>
Cc: eppext <>
Subject: Re: [eppext] WG Last Call - final charter
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:55:34 -0000

On 26 Jan 2016, at 3:00, Rik Ribbers wrote:

> However as time has passed a new draft has 
> surfaced(draft-lozano-ietf-eppext-registrar-expiration-date)  Should 
> we add this to the milestone list or not?
> I prefer not to add them and do a call for adoption when we finally 
> have the new charter in place (as we can do this based on our new 
> charter).

Thanks for your question!

We decided not to add anything that has not already been discussed for 
just this reason.  The milestones also set the priority for our tasks.

We can always change this but I think it’s more prudent to get a 
baseline established and then change as we go when needed.

Of course, if folks prefer a different path please do speak up.

> One side question:
> Will we alias the mailinglists (eppext, provreg weirds) into a new one 
> as discussed here: 
> Shouldn’t this be in the charter somewhere or is this just something 
> operational when the new charter is approved? Again I hope for the 
> last as I do not want to delay the rechartering process.

I don’t know about provreg but for eppext and weirds it is an 
operational issue and it will just happen.  I haven’t asked about the 
details but I presume that subscribers from both will be added to the 
new list.  We’ll get the specifics and let folks know.