RE: EPP to Draft: Next Steps

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.provreg
Message-ID <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF07E20EFE@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Patrick Mevzek
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 8:50 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP to Draft: Next Steps
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Sorry not to have responded earlier.
> 
> Hollenbeck, Scott <[email protected]> 2005-09-13 19:02
> > 1. I need to make a minor edit to the contact (3733bis) and host
> > (3732bis) documents to fix one last <poll> use description. 
>  I described
> > that fix here [1].  I also need to add a sentence to 
> 3730bis (EPP core)
> > to note that it obsoletes 3730.  The references in 3731bis 
> (domain) will
> > need to be updated if 3732bis and 3733bis change.  These 
> are the last
> > needed document changes I'm aware of.
> 
> I think it would be good if these new versions got a 1.1 value in the
> <version> tag during server greeting as opposed to 1.0 for the
> current RFCs.
> 
> There are minor incompatibilites between the two (among which how to
> fill <domain:update> in case of an extension), so it seems worthwile
> to me to be able to clearly separates between the two, as some
> servers will implement one version, and some will implement the
> other.

Given that the schemas have not changed, and the version numbers
identify the namespaces and schemas, I don't see the need to increment
the version numbers.  Anything that was working a certain way before
should continue to work the same way with the proposed text changes.

-Scott-
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.