Re: [provreg] [eppext] Inconsistency in number of status values in draft-tan-epp-launchphase-12 ?

On 06/03/2014 3:26 am, "Gavin Brown" <gavin.brown@centralnic.com> wrote:
>
> +1. Our implementation only supports a single status. Are there any
> implementations which require this design?

+1 we should keep it simple. already the spec supports quite a few use
cases, so unless this is a blocker for a common scenario we should not
allow multiple status values.

.wil

>
> I'll add this point to my slides for discussion tomorrow.
>
> G.
>
> On 05/03/2014 15:36, Gould, James wrote:
> > Patrick,
> >
> > Good catch. My recommendation is for the text to be tightened up to
> > support only a single status, since the status really reflects the
status
> > or state within the state diagram of Figure 1.  Adding support for
> > multiple statuses in the XML schema would make it more difficult for the
> > client to determine the state of the application. Thoughts?
> >
>
> --
> Gavin Brown
> Chief Technology Officer
> CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC)
> Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services
> for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries
> https://www.centralnic.com/
>
> CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with
> company
> number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London, EC2R 6AR.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> provreg mailing list
> provreg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
>