Re: Launch Phase EPP Extension Version 02 Posted

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:03:08PM +0000, Gould, James wrote:

> I agree that we should predefine as many known statuses as possible in the
> draft as an enumerated list.  How about if we take the approach of the launch
> phases with the inclusion of a "custom" status and an optional name attribute
> that can be used for define a sub-status of one of the enumerated statuses or
> used to define a completely custom status?  We can expand the enumerated list
> now for auction statuses if those statuses are known.  Trung, do you have any
> specific statuses that should be added now?  Would this meet the needs of a
> predefined list of statuses with some form of extensibility?  

The problem there is that it essentially makes the statuses freeform again, just
in a more awkward fashion. This kind of thing is harmful to interop. It's better
to have a well-defined set of statuses and a well-defined set of state
transitions that nobody is absolutely happy with but everyone at least agrees is
good enough than a mess of mutually slightly-incompatible riffs off of the same
theme.

I'd prefer to say YAGNI to this unless a strong case can be made to the
contrary.

K.

-- 
Keith Gaughan, Development Lead
PGP/GPG key ID: 82AC3634
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd. <http://blacknight.com/>
12A Barrowside Business Park, Carlow, Ireland
Registered in Ireland, Company No.: 370845
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg