Re: [weirds] I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-dnrd-ap-query-00.txt

[Andy Newton <[e-mail]>]

On May 1, 2012, at 12:22 PM, Dave Piscitello wrote:

> So we're clear, this increases the likelihood that other implementations than registry/registrar might extend the protocol in non-uniform manners. Would be nice to avoid but I'm not going to fall on my sword on this issue in this working group.

Nobody knows if it increases the likelihood, but the probability of protocol extensions is there any way. If we attempt to throw every feature into the protocol now in fear of not being able to add extensions later, then it is gonna be really difficult to get the first revision out the door and thus will validate the fears of some of the critics of this work.

Maybe we should keep a list of features desired but not for the first pass. Often the more complex use cases are clarified after an initial go round with the base features.

-andy