Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-gould-casanova-regext-unhandled-namespaces

With chair hat on:

As the CALL FOR ADOPTION comes to a close, the chairs want to thank you 
for your comments and let you know we’re leaning towards interpreting 
your message as a no objection.

Would you like to clarify your position?

Thanks,

Antoin and Jim

On 28 Jan 2020, at 2:10, Patrick Mevzek wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020, at 09:50, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
>> This is a formal adoption request for Extensible Provisioning 
>> Protocol
>> (EPP) Unhandled Namespaces:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gould-casanova-regext-unhandled-namespaces/
>>
>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for
>> adoption by REGEXT, and comment to the list, clearly stating your 
>> view.
>
> The subject can be interesting to the working group and might warrant 
> an RFC
> (although registries and registrars worked for 20 years without 
> trouble
> in handling this case, so one might imagine it is maybe too late or
> not a big enough problem).
>
> However, as discussed previously, in its current form this draft will
> introduce interoperability problems[1], so this just exchanges one 
> problem with another.
>
> So I am mildly convinced work is required, and mildly unconvinced that
> the draft as it stands completely address the issue.
>
> [1] TL;DR: a registrar has no way to automatically discover
> a registry is using the mechanism outlined in this document,
> as not announced in the greeting part.
>
> -- 
>   Patrick Mevzek
>   pm@dotandco.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext