Archive

[weirds] Fwd: rechartering

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Tue, 28 July 2015 13:19 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAQiQRdBDKb8NF+d2COxTVCbx7MMtV4dsTRDSqBotq6XroHxBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAQiQRdBDKb8NF+d2COxTVCbx7MMtV4dsTRDSqBotq6XroHxBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:19:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAQiQRd=65H=oTGFEz5ew_+cbKiKZo+xu5Ypb+cf89KtrPK0Pw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
To: "weirds@ietf.org" <weirds@ietf.org>, eppext@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04427130794cb1051bef53d9
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/weirds/ARHglXnY_3e9teF_8J3DvBqWlYU>
Subject: [weirds] Fwd: rechartering
Precedence: list

Since there has been no negative feedback, I'm cross-posting this to WEIRDS
to see what people over there think.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:21 PM
Subject: rechartering
To: eppext@ietf.org

All,

I'd like to offer another idea for the rechartering of this working group.
Instead of focusing exclusively on EPP extensions, would it be better if we
rechartered to focus on protocol issues of Internet registries... more
specifically EPP and RDAP.

Given that the constituencies for both have considerable overlap, and there
is already at least one draft covering the mapping between EPP and RDAP and
that there will likely be future drafts where the inputs of EPP and the
outputs of RDAP are correlated, this seems like an easier way forward.

I spoke privately with Scott, Barry, and Pete (the AD behind the chartering
of both EPPEXT and WEIRDS) just to see if I wasn't barking madd, and they
each thought it makes sense.

What are your thoughts and comments about such an approach?

-andy

[weirds] Fwd: rechartering Andrew Newton
Re: [weirds] Fwd: rechartering Ulrich Wisser
Re: [weirds] Fwd: rechartering Roger D Carney
Re: [weirds] Fwd: rechartering Andrew Newton