RE: BEEP Document Comments (was RE: July milestones)

"Zhang, Ning" <Ning.Zhang@neustar.biz> Fri, 26 July 2002 18:17 UTC

Received: from nic.cafax.se (nic.cafax.se [192.71.228.17]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA02928 for <provreg-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:17:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nic.cafax.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nic.cafax.se (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6QICYo2004257 for <ietf-provreg-outgoing@nic.cafax.se>; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 20:12:34 +0200 (MEST)
Received: by nic.cafax.se (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g6QICYGq004256 for ietf-provreg-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 20:12:34 +0200 (MEST)
X-Authentication-Warning: nic.cafax.se: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se using -f
Received: from willow.neustar.com (willow.neustar.com [209.173.53.84]) by nic.cafax.se (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g6QICXo2004250 for <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 20:12:33 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from stntimc1.va.neustar.com (stih650a-eth-s1p2c0.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.81]) by willow.neustar.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6QICTD28816 for <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 18:12:30 GMT
Received: by STNTIMC1 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <306V4KCZ>; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:13:17 -0400
Message-ID: <15A2739B7DAA624D8091C65981D7DA8107BD9C@stntexch2.va.neustar.com>
From: "Zhang, Ning" <Ning.Zhang@neustar.biz>
To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: RE: BEEP Document Comments (was RE: July milestones)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:12:22 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Precedence: bulk

Scott,

Thanks for the comments. 

>> Well, we do have some current comments on the document...but Rick's 
>> question is still germane, what community is forming around a BEEP 
>> transport for EPP?

> There are also some old comments that haven't been completely addressed:
>
> http://www.cafax.se/ietf-provreg/maillist/2001-09/msg00010.html
> 
> Specifically, the TCP transport clarification and "Content-Type: text/xml"
> comments.  Also, the IESG is getting picky about splitting references into
> normative and informative subsections, so that should be done in the
> document.

We are aware of this. It just did not get changed in the last draft.

> New comment/thought: would it be wise to consider Marshall's transient
> profile identifier ideas, described here:?
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mrose-beep-transientid-02.txt

I think that it would be good idea to following this practice. 

Thanks,
-Ning