Re: EPP extensions working group

Jay,

I believe that your additional criteria might overly filter the candidate
set of extensions.  There are clear standard track extensions including
draft-tan-epp-launchphase and draft-obispo-epp-idn that could go through
as individual submissions as long as an AD is willing to take them based
on their maturity and based on the discussions that have already occurred
on the provreg list.  There are a large set of extensions that have been
and are in the process of being built that could be of general interest.
If this working group is meant to be "short lived" and to handle initially
the low hanging fruit, then certainly it could take on the extensions that
are primed for standards track like draft-tan-epp-launchphase and
draft-obispo-epp-idn.  I am not sure if these two extensions alone are
enough to form a working group, since they could be individual
submissions.  The ConsoliDate Mapping
(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽconsolidate-mapping.txt) extension
created by Scott Hollenbeck back in 2005 for supporting synchronization of
expiration dates might be of general interest and applicable for the
working group even though it would violate your #1 and #2 criteria items.
There is no issue with your #3 criteria item.  My proposal is to focus on
the following extensions:

1. draft-tan-epp-launchphase along with the dependent draft-lozano-tmch-smd
2. draft-obispo-epp-idn
3. ConsoliDate Mapping
 
Hopefully we can create a broader charter in the future to attack the set
of custom extensions that are of general interest.
    
-- 
 
JG
 

 
James Gould
Principal Software Engineer
[email protected]
 
703-948-3271 (Office)
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
VerisignInc.com





On 7/28/13 10:54 PM, "Jay Daley" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Please see the note below from John Levine. Does anyone know of any
>>other EPP extensions that meet the conditions laid out by Pete? I'd like
>>to consider non-Verisign extensions, too.
>
>Yes I agree in principle but not to most of the specific extensions
>below. 
>
>> If this effort is successful we may have a better chance of creating a
>>working group to develop extensions that don't yet exist or haven't been
>>documented in the IETF.
>
>Great - that's very much needed as the IETF is in danger of becoming
>irrelevant in this particular niche.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John R Levine [mailto:[email protected]]
>
>> I talked to Pete Resnick, one of the IETF apps area ADs yesterday, and
>>he 
>> says he's willing to set up a short lived working group to turn EPP
>> extension drafts into RFCs.  There are two conditions: that we identify
>> the drafts in advance, all of which have to be in current use, and that
>>we 
>> round up enough people with implementation experience to read them and
>> confirm that what we plan to publish is what they implemented.
>
>I would add the following criteria
>
>1.  Are not proprietary to a specific registry
>2.  Have already had significant discussion and review on the provreg list
>3.  Are not patent encumbered
>
>> IDN Language Tag
>>(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽidn-language-tag.pdf)
>> RGP Poll Mapping
>>(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽwhois-info-extension.pdf)
>> Whois Info Extension
>>(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽwhois-info-extension.pdf)
>> ConsoliDate Mapping
>>(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽconsolidate-mapping.txt)
>> NameStore Extension
>>(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽnamestore-extension.pdf)
>> Low Balance Mapping
>>(http:ŽŽwww.verisigninc.comŽassetsŽlow-balance-mapping.pdf)
>
>None of which I would support for violating #2, mostly violating #1 and
>probably violating #3 of my criteria above.
>
>(BTW How the hell does someone get forward slashes that are not forward
>slashes into URLs?)
>
>> draft-obispo-epp-idn
>
>Yes.
>
>> draft-tan-epp-launchphase
>
>Yes.
>
>> If there are any more you think we should add, please let me know.
>
>As Patrik points out, the shorter the list the better.
>
>cheers
>Jay
>
>> 
>> Also, it would be a big help if you could suggest people at registries
>>and 
>> registrars who have implemented these so we can ask them to read along.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> John Levine, [email protected], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
>> "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.
>> _______________________________________________
>> provreg mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
>
>
>-- 
>Jay Daley
>Chief Executive
>.nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited)
>desk: +64 4 931 6977
>mobile: +64 21 678840
>linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/jaydaley
>
>_______________________________________________
>provreg mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg

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