IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] [regext] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11

"Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Sun, 03 November 2019 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44DDA1200A4; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 05:18:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 gWSlxHEOjuRE; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 05:18:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 678BF120089; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 05:18:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ajax-webmail-ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) ; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 21:18:49 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
X-Originating-IP: [159.226.7.2]
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 21:18:49 +0800
X-CM-HeaderCharset: UTF-8
From: Jiankang Yao <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, regext@ietf.org
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Coremail Webmail Server Version XT3.0.8 dev build 20190610(cb3344cf) Copyright (c) 2002-2019 www.mailtech.cn cnnic
In-Reply-To: <5D394E0244700A5D092F1181@PSB>
References: <157074817849.20459.11318968277639852496@ietfa.amsl.com> <754e85cd.1470.16dce6a353a.Coremail.yaojk@cnnic.cn> <cffa265b-5df3-fdea-f57a-7af30880a154@joelhalpern.com> <5D394E0244700A5D092F1181@PSB>
X-SendMailWithSms: false
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <66fbcb79.1705.16e316b0da2.Coremail.yaojk@cnnic.cn>
X-Coremail-Locale: zh_CN
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0BpGL25075dTyawBA--.6595W
X-CM-SenderInfo: x1dryyw6fq0xffof0/1tbiAQADDSVCN6F8nAAAse
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Ur529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7IcSsGvfJ3iIAIbVAYjsxI4VWxJw CS07vEb4IE77IF4wCS07vE1I0E4x80FVAKz4kxMIAIbVAFxVCaYxvI4VCIwcAKzIAtYxBI daVFxhVjvjDU=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/JQCNhOQiphQ_xfv1ctGApbGt4RU>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [regext] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 13:18:58 -0000



> -----原始邮件-----
> 发件人: "John C Klensin" <john-ietf@jck.com>
> 发送时间: 2019-10-16 00:59:47 (星期三)
> 收件人: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
> 抄送: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, regext@ietf.org
> 主题: Re: [regext] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11
> 
> Joel,
> 
> Let me try one reason why this should not be Standards Track or,
> if it should, it isn't ready.  It uses, and is dependent on,
> terminology for which there is no consensus definition and that
> is used to describe different things in the wild.  As I think I
> suggested one of my earlier notes about this, it would be
> possible to say "these terms mean whatever the registry says
> they mean", explicitly anticipating that different registries
> might use the extension for slightly different purposes.  
>

Dear John,
Thanks a lot for your kind review.

As you mentioned it in other email, currently, there has no universally agreed definition about "variant".
You said "it would be possible to say "these terms mean whatever the registry says they mean". I agree with your understanding.
In this document, we focus on policy based domain name bundling. Different registry may have different policy for their bundling name registration based on EPP.  The bundling name registration system is mainly used by the registry and its registrars. Some regards samename.TLD1 and samename.TLD2 as bundling names; some regards name1.TLD and name2.TLD as the bundling names. Here, name1 may be simple Chinese name verison, name2 may be traditional Chinese name version. What is name1 and what is name2 are defined by registry's own policy.

The word "variant" only appear in the introduction of this document. If you think that the variant has not good definition,
can we remove the "variant" word and use other word  such as "bundling name"?

Or do you have good text/words to kindly help to improve the document?

Thanks a lot.

Jiankang Yao

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email