Re: [regext] Re-chartering REGEXT?

Maarten,

I think proposing some charter text is a good idea.

And I support this if the charter is to be used to exclude some
proposals for EPP transports but not others, as has been argued.

-andy

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:59 PM Maarten Wullink
<maarten.wullink=40sidn.nl@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> The REGEXT WG charter seems to be limited to only allow work on EPP extensions?
>
> The WG preliminary consensus is that updating the charter for new transports (requires RFC5730, sec 2.1 compliance) is not required.
> Because a new transport is regarded as a type of extension, so for anything else we would need to update the charter?
>
> This means there is no defined process anywhere, currently, for EPP related work, such as RESTful EPP (or anything else that is not a extension),
> which according to some in this WG is not a transport but something else.
>
> RESTful EPP does not require modification of the EPP RFCs, it does include support for alternative data representations such as JSON.
>
> The participants of this WG are the experts in this area, and the right people to also work on improvements and/or enhancements of the EPP protocol and new work such as RESTful EPP.
>
> Therefore, I propose that we expand the charter of this WG to also include the above-mentioned activities e.g. not strictly limiting the WG to extensions only.
>
> I’m willing to help in updating the charter if this something we agree on doing.
>
> Best,
>
> Maarten
>
> ------
> ps:
>
> The previous version of the charter included text, that did allow work on more than extensions only:
>
> “The working group may also, in consultation with its responsible area
> director, take on work related to the operation of Internet identifier
> registries, beyond the EPP and RDAP protocols.”
>
> See: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-regext/01-00/
>
> This was modified for the current charter, but still not very specific and may allow for work on RESTful EPP?
>
> "The working group may also take on work to develop specifications that
> describe the following types of information exchanged between entities
> involved in Internet identifier registration that are using the RDAP or
> EPP protocols:
>     • Uniform representation formats for publishing local policy or
> configuration options regarding EPP and RDAP use.
>     • Data formats for files exchanged between registration entities that
> need insertion in or extraction from EPP or RDAP.
>     • Technical guidance for registration processes that are supported by
> EPP or RDAP.”
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext