Re: Merging RRP and Whois

Eric,

Right. We are still probably doing scoping. However, I do want to remind
everyone that if ProReg is nothing more than an improved SRS/RRP for
ICANN-accredited registrar to Verisign, then IMHO we dont need this WG.

SRS/RRP is so specific to Verisign design that I am not sure how useful
it is to other Registries. If you are looking for an improved SRS/RRP,
then Verisign can do it on their own with their registrars.

In the same way, if result of this WG (if created), is not suitable for
my absurd needs, I will move on design my own or modify it with my
partners to suit our need.

Other registries may refused to adopted SRS/RRP just because it is
tailored to Verisign. I know quite a few Registries who has blantly
refused to use it so as not to create an association altho there is no
technical reason not to do so. Or they may use it and once again modify
it to their own.

Unfortunately, this means we end-up with variant of the basically same
protocol but yet not exactly the same. That is interoperability
nightmare.

-James Seng

> I'd like to keep the RRP-list scope closer to the SRS and RRP sense of
> scope, and keep the post-port-43 scope specific to some port other
than
> 43, with a 43-like, but "improved", services.
>
> Eric