Re: [weirds] Publishing of draft-gould-epp-rdap-status-mapping

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Tue, 26 May 2015 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@hxr.us>
X-Original-To: weirds@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: weirds@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA79F1ACD8E for <weirds@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 May 2015 10:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.078
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aUmlAs_O8cwW for <weirds@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 May 2015 10:31:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com (mail-wg0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F227D1ACD58 for <weirds@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 May 2015 10:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wghq2 with SMTP id q2so103643839wgh.1 for <weirds@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 May 2015 10:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=NvSph8p9yWzZem4TBBPkx0ERAmMALMEynyQCwrKdkd4=; b=TSxHX5OXUHMzpTP142e4R494+WR6fRaZH+iA/6Brq6PK+pYpdbQiQPfVO9Usq+omFp 5izRHoemM7GHm8UCfbZqInQNiM/gIY28qo72rsTQGEx7zWilr4Ah103WGY0P69hufh3s C+WfMu+bOjfr5mvZNGo2UGRVfEzhC0I308XEoLKfCEdTSyaN+rvq7jwvUXMakI/WS+Rt kChRdWYMmyCjzAwZ6dfiRJYBAk8SlZ6kibQWM76lsOonqlGTfPrhke/xTOF1+l+GECOe iwKSZ4sN2bib+vlQ/zNzCZDgOKVybq8O7JvEUFLmYKJ3gip9JRL3mDBIbYWNL/9DUwk2 CipQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkuFTBpi/dFvb21fOq0e+nTwErjJ56S/2lSM2I739zR1kVETE/RYCapnSB++RTEwcfVzuyj
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.5.135 with SMTP id s7mr51899858wjs.115.1432661491689; Tue, 26 May 2015 10:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.249.99 with HTTP; Tue, 26 May 2015 10:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [2001:500:4:15:6d13:f92f:21d4:d470]
In-Reply-To: <3AB48180-D187-44DA-B7B3-C50F25347DE2@verisign.com>
References: <3AB48180-D187-44DA-B7B3-C50F25347DE2@verisign.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 13:31:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAQiQRcA0K_adsZuqVhRM4f9bbPhEY-LHyc31vHiXYjaYOt4Fw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
To: "Gould, James" <JGould@verisign.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d58964bbe0c0516ff7fe6
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/weirds/xts_m7nXIMV8anWJT4eXxRbuTWc>
Cc: "weirds@ietf.org" <weirds@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [weirds] Publishing of draft-gould-epp-rdap-status-mapping
X-BeenThere: weirds@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "WHOIS-based Extensible Internet Registration Data Service \(WEIRDS\)" <weirds.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/weirds>, <mailto:weirds-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/weirds/>
List-Post: <mailto:weirds@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:weirds-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds>, <mailto:weirds-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 17:31:38 -0000

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Gould, James <JGould@verisign.com> wrote:

>  I did analysis of the EPP statuses with the statuses registered for use
> in RDAP.  The draft-gould-epp-rdap-status-mapping I-D (
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gould-epp-rdap-status-mapping-00 )
> identifies the gaps and includes registration entries to fill the gaps to
> ensure that all of the EPP RFC statuses are supported by RDAP.  Please
> review and provide any feedback.
>
>
James,

There is already a similar value to "linked". It is "associated".

And I think it is great that you have written up an I-D on this, but
getting values into the registry simply requires providing the information
you have in Section 3.1 to the IANA, who will have the Expert Reviewers*
verify you have met the criteria. In other words, publication of an RFC is
not necessary.

*I don't know who they are. I don't even know if the IESG ever assigned any.

-andy