From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: regext@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:13:25 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <53f95a88-c0cd-4fc1-87da-bf5c8c79815c@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
In-Reply-To: <a5f9c82e-a050-4df2-ae48-135c1a5c17fb@denic.de>
References: <603C6F0D-CED2-4624-8F2E-6A9F4BEB6083@sidn.nl>
 <CAN8C-_KWKxJ47CkL31UNPCgs0wqi6zce=j4aFPvDY4e4cnXn7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <780DCB74-893A-4D32-8DAA-35BC91FD3AC7@verisign.com>
 <a5f9c82e-a050-4df2-ae48-135c1a5c17fb@denic.de>
User-Agent: Trojita/v0.7-599-gbe0cf694; Qt/5.15.8; wayland; Linux;
 Devuan GNU/Linux 5 (daedalus)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: JJJXOMXMAAFTPC7GZ7C3TEAWE334SDWP
Precedence: list
Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5Bregext=5D_Re=3A_RESTful_EPP_Charter_side_meeting_Thursday_13=3A?=
	=?utf-8?q?00?=
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/gh0mGg-PkBn9wlFba8buuJPr0wI>

Hi,

I've attended the meetings since Prague but am not an EPP person. Permit =
me=20
to offer a different perspective, based on what you've been saying about=20
the other topics of discussion.

When you've talked about EPP during those meetings, you talked about the=20
data model, the commands, but you hardly ever mentioned XML. XML didn't=20
sound like a core part of the EPP that exists in your minds. I heard =
many=20
arguments against or in favour of one proposal or another, but noone =
stood=20
up and the mike to say "because =E2=80=A6 XML", see? XML seems about as =
central as=20
TCP.

On this view, REPP might be called an unanticipated extension. If the =
data=20
model and commands don't change at all, then this isn't the kind of=20
extension that 5730-3 define, but it does extend that which you talk =
about=20
as being EPP.

On the other hand, if the data model or commands do change=E2=80=A6 so I =
suggest=20
that a separate WG makes sense if and only if REPP is permitted to =
change=20
the data model or commands.

Arnt