Hi all,

I thought I would start a new thread because the other one is quite long and 
the conversation is all over the place.

There are two IANA registries at play here, the one governed by RFC 3688 (XML 
Registry) and the one governed by RFC 7451 (EPP Extensions).

The XML Registry is for XML namespace, schema, and publicId registrations. Any 
XML namespace identifier that is a URI can be registered in it, however only 
the IETF via an RFC can register urn:ietf... namespace identifiers.

The EPP extensions registry is a place where URLs to EPP extension 
specifications can be registered, and anybody can register an EPP extension. 
Unfortunately, many EPP extensions do not have their namespace identifiers and 
schemas registered in the XML registry. This is bad for interoperability, which 
is the entire point of an IANA registry. Even worse, six of the EPP extensions 
in this registry use urn:ietf namespace identifiers, and in at least one case 
claiming IPR over it. They should not be doing that.

While mistakes were made, we should not allow this to continue by requiring 
registrations into the EPP extensions registry to first require registrations 
in the XML registry. This will prevent the IETF namespace squatting, 
collisions, and it is good for interoperability.

To allow I-Ds, the EPP extensions registry could be modified to allow "provisional" or 
"early" registrations that sidestep the XML namespace registration requirements. This is 
done in many IANA protocol registries setup by the IETF, and IANA knows how to periodically check 
on provisional and early registrations.

Finally, the question was asked about I-Ds that are abandoned or rejected by 
the IETF. Those can be registered as proprietary extensions by their respective 
authors simply by changing the namespace URIs to something the authors control. 
From a running code perspective, this is no different than having had the 
namespace id revised during the working group deliberations because though some 
EPP namespace ids appear to have semantic meaning, to XML they are all opaque.

-andy







_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to