Jim, Jasdip Singh's feedback has been incorporated into draft-ietf-regext-rdap-redacted-13. I believe that all feedback has been addressed.
Thanks, -- JG James Gould Fellow Engineer [email protected] <applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/[email protected]> 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> On 6/26/23, 10:49 AM, "regext on behalf of James Galvin" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 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] > <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tYf0mCBZUnEmTi2UWGO_5nbBOq4S5uK2pKN0rpsuTEU4dxpnhBvY4TNF_yUEAnIpZySu3fRKKTMixhF6hZzlb3loO4EKp7wThXhVdDCFsYk62VD8Or5C2p_7Jz7-0kpj64vJa9QMenWqDgwqRTUgkXQYEA4DlBH4RHGOAdDmpFHlftJ7ggffOqXGBnQs5E6H8uLq6qYtB9qUPE5UnwhMKP0zuJvdDRqmRuz9h2b-cpFY37UNYVZ5Vmomb4C1IZvQWQ7V0bjaTrM8ng7ic8W1VpXx2q1DuGZBq33KO6jq66c/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tYf0mCBZUnEmTi2UWGO_5nbBOq4S5uK2pKN0rpsuTEU4dxpnhBvY4TNF_yUEAnIpZySu3fRKKTMixhF6hZzlb3loO4EKp7wThXhVdDCFsYk62VD8Or5C2p_7Jz7-0kpj64vJa9QMenWqDgwqRTUgkXQYEA4DlBH4RHGOAdDmpFHlftJ7ggffOqXGBnQs5E6H8uLq6qYtB9qUPE5UnwhMKP0zuJvdDRqmRuz9h2b-cpFY37UNYVZ5Vmomb4C1IZvQWQ7V0bjaTrM8ng7ic8W1VpXx2q1DuGZBq33KO6jq66c/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext> _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
