Re: [weirds] New Unified DNR/RIR Internet-Drafts

["Murray S. Kucherawy" <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Kevin Tse <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi Francisco,Linlin,
>
> I support your comments.
> The working of unifying NAME and NUMBER makes sense, but except the
> 'structure' i did not get the 'common' section for both NAME and
> NUMBER.I wonder why.
>
> I think the work of object inventory is still needed until we have
> consensus on common elements.

Just to be clear: I'm not proposing adoption of these documents as
completed working group items, but merely as starting points for
working on our deliverables.  Working group development would follow,
of course.

A fairly complete set would appear to be something like:

draft-designteam-weirds-using-http
draft-hollenbeck-weirds-rdap-sec
draft-hollenbeck-weirds-unified-rdap-query
draft-newton-weirds-unified-json-response
draft-kucherawy-weirds-requirements (but only if we want to keep a
requirements document going)

The issues of redirection and service discovery don't appear to be
covered in this set.  I seem to recall consensus ion Vancouver
swinging in the direction of deciding that we don't want to tackle
discovery on a first pass, but I can't recall where we landed on
redirection.  (I also admit I haven't yet reviewed the JSON response
document to know if it covers redirection.)  Please correct me if I'm
wrong there.

So far response to the middle three has been entirely positive.  Can I
get some comments on the first and last, and also on the issue of
redirection, and a few more comments from people representing the name
registries?

If there's consensus supporting these as starting point documents,
we'll invite the authors to submit them as WG items in another week or
so, and then we can get to work.

-MSK, WEIRDS co-chair