Re: FW: EPP extensions working group

Patrick Mevzek <[email protected]> 2013-07-22 23:27
> Please have a look also in this presentation I made in 2006:
> http://www.dotandco.com/services/software/Net-DRI/docs/netdri-future-epp-icann-brussels-ccnso-techday-201006/netdri-future-epp-icann-brussels-ccnso-techday-201006.pdf
 
My bad, it was done in June 2010, not in 2006.

Also, before starting any work on past extensions, I believe it would
be useful (even if a little late, the good time would have been before
ICANN accepted new gTLDs) to make whatever is necessary to make sure
people are not creating new duplication, by purpose or just ignorance
of what is happening. I do not claim to know what would be necessary
for that, nor knowing if this problem has really a solution. ICANN
could put some pressure on gTLD markets, but less so on ccTLD ones.

For example, if I'm not mistaken, there are 2 drafts for handling
specific registry phases, such as sunrise and such. Since I've not
studied both of them a lot, I can not argue definitively that they
could be merged completely, but from experience I'm sure there is some
possible mutualisation.

As stated in my presentation however the crux of the problem is not
technical but economical : specifically for currently in use
extensions, registries will have no incentive to switch over new ones
doing the same thing even if done more "standardized", with registrars
not wanting to change their existing implementation
(from my ccTLD technical experience, we still see people struggling
with DNSSEC in general, and specifically DNSSEC in EPP)

This is my only fear in working on "unified/standardized" versions: at
the end, what guarantee do we have that we have really replaced the
old ones, and not just create another iteration?

Obligatory XKCD on that: http://xkcd.com/927/

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