Hi Orie, Thank you for applying the changes. It looks like we reached consensus. There is only one comment from tjw that has not been captured in Github yet:
"My comment on Marc’s suggestions is to not limit to “transport related” wgs but any relevant working groups” which applies to this text: * The specification of application transport protocols for EPP based on existing RFCs, with proper review and advice from the relevant transport protocol working group. I suggest changing that to: * The specification of application transport protocols for EPP based on existing RFCs, with proper review and advice from the relevant protocol working group. Regards, Antoin - -- Antoin Verschuren Tweevoren 6, 5672 SB Nuenen, NL M: +31 6 37682392 > Op 1 okt. 2025, om 14:50 heeft Orie <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven: > > Hi, > > Its been silent for a while on > https://github.com/ietf-artarea/charters/pull/55 > <https://github.com/ietf-artarea/charters/pull/55> > > I have applied the suggestions. > > Are there any objections to my taking these changes without diving into > "profiles"? > > If not, please send text to the list for discussion. > > Regards, > > OS, ART AD > > > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 10:13 AM Pawel Kowalik <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Orie, > > For RDAP profile is (or can be) an extension same time. Extension mechanism > is used as signalling in this case. > > See 2.1.1 of draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions. > > From this perspective the WG does not make protocol profiling as such but > mechanisms needed for profiling were coped with so far. > > Kind Regards, > > Pawel > > On 16.09.25 15:38, Orie wrote: >> Excellent point. >> >> Would it not be easier to remove the word profile though? >> >> Have we ever done profiles in this WG before? >> >> Why should profiles be in scope? >> >> Regards, >> >> OS >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 4:53 AM Maarten Wullink <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hi Orie, >> >> >> Minor comment here, >> >> > >> > >> > A primary goal of the working group is to ensure the profiles and >> > extensions are easily discoverable and understood, and to avoid duplicate >> > effort that could harm interoperability. >> > >> >> This is the first and only mention a the “profile” concept, and it is used >> in the context of the primary goal of the wg. >> Does this not warrant some additional text describing what a profile is or >> adding a line saying what profile related wg activities are in scope? >> >> Regards, >> Maarten >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> regext mailing list -- [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
