Re: Standard Extensions

> So to get back to Patrik's original question, what can be done to reduce the number of extra extensions and registry (or registrar) foibles? Could this list define a minimum set of requirements and/or interoperability features which every EPP-capable registry or registry would be expected to implement?

Jim, maybe we (registrars) could come up with the main differences and how those were implemented by the registries.

As of personal experience I can tell that some of the 'e' 's have been implemented throughout different registries, just differently.
Inside the EPP standard those parameters could be optional, but at least they should be standardized.

Also as a minimum requirement, the use of optional parameters in extensions should be deprecated by way of the standard's own definition.

Other thoughts? Comments?

Günther

_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg