At 12:17 AM 7/17/01 -0400, Phillip Beazley wrote:
>At 12:02 AM 7/17/2001 -0400, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
>
>>If we'd looked closer at this particular irk, then we'd probably have
>>implemented a much more comprehensive solution. Unfortunately, we didn't go
>>deep enough on the issue.
>
>So does this basically mean we're SOL forever on this issue or what?
Absolutely not -
This has been on our list for a long time, and is coming close to getting
worked on. You, can help by providing your thoughts on how it should be done.
Specifically:
- should we introduce handles that would work across profiles (essentially,
you can assign a role to a handle, and then modify that handle as necessary)
- if we were to increase the power of certain roles (technical contact
control of NS's for example), how should we introduce this? How should we
deal with legacy roles of this type - extend them the same power
automagically, or require that they specifically ask for the new role type
- how important would providing support for existing handles at other
registries be? would it be worth supporting this considering the large
complexities it would introduce to development?
- what works well now, what stinks, and what must you have in a new system?
Regards,
sA
Scott Allan
Director OpenSRS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
