[regext] Re: RESTful EPP Charter side meeting Thursday 13:00

[George Michaelson <[e-mail]>]

Yea, I think we probably agree but my comment was to new WG charter
not REGEXT re-charter. If we put EPP-on-REST to a new WG, the WG
should do the formalism of REST and JSON (!) for it, and then walk
away. Future revisions to functional elements? Good question.

I presume if the REST model worked, ICANN would also incur some ..
belief it was moving contracted obligations to support it? We're not
e.g. doing work to a dream are we? Is there a belief we can specify a
protocol which ICANN will at some level "commit" to adopting?
requiring? Mandating? Not things in our purview of course, but I want
to believe the prime body here is not going to say "cute: not
interested"

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 11:30 AM Jim Reid <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 25 Jul 2024, at 02:05, George Michaelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > I ask that we try to narrow charter scope and not become "the WG which lives forever”
>
> That’s a nice ambition George. However I expect some form of regexp WG will stick around until ICANN stops adding or changing goop in its registry-registrar model. :-(
>
> That said, a narrowed charter scope would be wise. Though I think the current charter is good enough and said so at the mike.
>
>