Re: [regext] [Ext] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

["Gould, James" <[e-mail]>]

+1

--

JG

[cid:[e-mail]933A30]

James Gould
Fellow Engineer
[e-mail]<applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/[e-mail]>

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

Verisign.com<http://verisigninc.com/>

From: Roger Carney <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, May 7, 2020 at 2:42 PM
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck=[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "rwilton=[e-mail]" <rwilton=[e-mail]>
Cc: James Gould <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, Gustavo Lozano <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] [Ext] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

+1 Scott.



________________________________
From: regext <[e-mail]> on behalf of Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck=[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 12:53 PM
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; rwilton=[e-mail] <rwilton=[e-mail]>
Cc: Gould, James <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [regext] [Ext] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Notice: This email is from an external sender.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: regext <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
> Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 1:37 PM
> To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton=[e-mail]>
> Cc: Gould, James <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; The IESG
> <[e-mail]>; Gustavo Lozano <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] [Ext] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-
> regext-data-escrow-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
>
> I'm afraid I have to agree with Gustavo that the terms used here need to
> match what's used in the domain this is written for.  It's often the case that
> things mean different things in different domains, and sometimes those
> domains are similar enough that we wish it weren't the case.  When it is,
> that's sad... but.
>
> Unless someone in the working group wants to tell us that Gustavo is wrong
> and we should go with what Rob suggests, I think the discussion has been
> had.  I *would* like to hear some input from the working group on this,
> though, before we make any final decisions.

A description of the terms tied to their use in the document really should be sufficient.

Scott
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1EvBdAuTh6SeIjTasIIGXwv8kKVDSLyt0_qT29j2WvMNxj8lBobpFge1St5yqvN7Zv_RuzvkCiMIx_mZ1oXG70mBsIjbmmoOjLKs3M57KzrpZ_eBlOUeJZKquyJMt25qLWjFVQcPO20KJto1AN7TJPB7joJYGqbM8-pBlMtJLwnn25SHl9dvOBxTt6mwrm-HXoCTrfieu6S2bBDzQMxGPkDtdUJLOhydh3qyKa32gyxWrKIfgX7SxOzE_Y8RwyMrYfqUm61iYqKZie2L3NjRoEg/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext>