I think Andy's right about this. We don't need to wait. Scott
> -----Original Message----- > From: regext <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Galvin > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 10:48 AM > To: Andrew Newton <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; draft-regext-rdap- > [email protected]; REGEXT Working Group <[email protected]> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] status draft-ietf-regext-rdap-redacted-12 > > Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click > links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > > Thanks for this Andy. Very helpful. > > The Chairs would very much appreciate other comments regarding whether or > not to actually delay the redacted draft based on the format discussion. > > Note that we’re “waiting” now on the shepherd process regardless, but if the > WG can resolve this question of “delay” before the shepherd is done we’ll be > able to move this document along as soon as it’s ready. > > Thanks! > > Antoin and Jim > > > > On 26 Jun 2023, at 10:38, Andrew Newton wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 9:49 AM James Galvin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> 2. Andy Newton needs to confirm on the list that all of his concerns have > been addressed. Tom Harrison has already indicated that his concerns have > been addressed. > > > > My apologies. I confirm my concerns have been addressed. > > > >> > >> The Chairs would also like to note that given the new discussion regarding > jCard vs jsContact vs SimpleContact, that we will be delaying the actual > submission of this document to the IESG until that discussion resolves. It > seems > prudent to make sure there is no impact to the “redacted” document as a > result of the format discussion before we submit it to the IESG. > >> > > > > I appreciate the prudence, and practically it may not matter if > > submission to the IESG is delayed given the dependency on JSONPath and > > IESG workload. That said, I do not believe this is necessary. Let me > > explain. > > > > Much of the complexity in the RDAP redaction spec has to do with > > getting around weird things in jCard, but as Marc has pointed out, > > jCard will be with us for the foreseeable future. Though I strongly > > suspect redaction will be easier with a theoretical SimpleContact, it > > could be quite some time before we know that. And the RDAP redaction > > spec covers more than contact data, so it is useful outside of the > > contact data discussions. > > > > The complications with redaction with regard to JSContact center > > around client processing of JSContact patch objects before, after or > > during client processing of the redaction directives. This is > > something the JSContact drafts could specify without need to modify > > the RDAP redaction, IMHO. I believe the UID issue has been resolved. > > Finally, JSContact may take some time to get to the publication point > > considering its dependency. > > > > That's my opinion. Maybe others see it differently. > > > > -andy > > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list > [email protected] > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1fn2nFr_Gq7- > VAyWB7a4zkN2PEmD0iHPtTxhfJGtTFL0Ekc52x_fyC1gXu9rONI24Sg6xMRdOeJ1S > pQCBEHa2g2vOwFQJtIFzSabsje1x41zyr4- > ZT88f_IzxAp0A1Uah8NMsNWH6k4GWP0rWIckdlF3Ho7CXBYmrxi3DVJ3IU2LKW7 > w4_R6oRQNEnN2V5rl9Fj5jdUThzRmF5veLQIYcvFmP0FuRaE3VIuAsfMGDuwrxEH > nW6dsC_f3eyDznWJWoy3hBtXRSp0B- > QY82r1X_0A2SX7OF_ayKxyKKy_YrPj8/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailm > an%2Flistinfo%2Fregext _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
