We could submit the draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02 to IANA again, but the 
extension uses the IETF namespace “urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:idn-1.0” which is 
already claimed by a non-IETF clone with IPR attached.
if the XML schema of draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02  and the clone are identical, 
then a easy fix can be replacing the current clone by the “official” IETF 
version.
this would then not cause issues for clients, as the XML has not changed.

-
Maarten



> Op 7 nov 2025, om 10:23 heeft Gould, James 
> <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Scott,
> 
> That's the complexity here where there are many independent implementations 
> of a published IETF draft extension.  None of those implementors have the 
> copyright for the extension, so how do we get that extension in the EPP 
> extension registry to ensure that it's publicized as an implemented EPP 
> extension without forking and getting into copyright issues?  I went through 
> the process to get the verification code extension registered as an 
> implementer of draft-ietf-regext-verificationcode, which felt unnatural, but 
> that may be the only option for this corner case.  The registrant is the 
> first one to attempt to register it an abandoned extension.  I don't believe 
> additional implementors care if the extension is already in the EPP extension 
> registry, but that is a question.  One of the implementers of the IDN map 
> extension (draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02) could submit the registration request 
> to get it into the EPP extension registry to publicize its implementation 
> that retains the IETF copyright.  
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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 11/7/25, 10:14 AM, "Hollenbeck, Scott" 
> <[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. 
> 
> 
> Jim, the working group can't register extensions on behalf of implementers. 
> That's a job for the implementers themselves, who need to provide contact 
> information, applicable TLDs, etc. as part of the process.
> 
> 
> This raises another question, though: what should be done if two or more 
> implementers attempt to register the same draft? Do they all get registered 
> separately, or should the registry entry somehow be combined to include 
> information for all implementations?
> 
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gould, James <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Sent: Friday, November 7, 2025 9:59 AM
>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: The IETF XML registry and the EPP Extensions
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> Andy,
>> 
>> One other recommendation is to have the REGEXT working group proactively
>> register known implemented abandoned IETF drafts in the EPP extension
>> registry, which would apply to the IDN mapping extension that looks to have
>> been implemented by many registries. Those extensions could be considered
>> for progression to RFC, but since they have the IETF copyright its best to 
>> have
>> the IETF register them instead of each of the implementing registries. This
>> would meet the goal of publicizing the implementation of past abandoned IETF
>> drafts without getting into the negative side effect of forking them as
>> proprietary extensions on a per-registry basis. I'm unsure how that would 
>> work,
>> but having an accurate list of implemented EPP extensions in the EPP 
>> extension
>> registry would have helped with the EPP Extensibility and Extension Analysis
>> work. Again, I would not go down the path of registering the XML namespace in
>> the XML registry, since they are known non-final extensions.
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> JG
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> James Gould
>> Fellow Engineer
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
>> <applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-
>> B4BA42740803/[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> 
>> 703-948-3271
>> 12061 Bluemont Way
>> Reston, VA 20190
>> 
>> Verisign.com <http://secure-
>> web.cisco.com/1a8gFNtQjATGMhcWDGYlYjI8jWFDYkoNRcIv_i2T1nGNW9LruU9
>> xYm6Dp9h6ExhfAN7czLIcs-
>> X2PVYYaeaMDfb0x18xDvE9VZn9b9uH75pW5wEfd6jpadXzppRCUX6iyWImRqtIN-
>> j2oafoJGr_Z8wMQgzq6oVTMLZcEpgukBr5YAqxZEIkoiszriCoLdQdYSDBTVo1Ceg7I
>> NxBC32vueRmsBvrm3VJ67VAvhT2MyHGKnHSB2477TcF5QfDNLjMwzskNLZ9coC
>> wGyDHFlKCwo_564F7otNOdRte8jc2tymzJ04d0Seq8_q0KtLApH5Su/http%3A%2F
>> %2Fverisigninc.com%2F>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/7/25, 9:20 AM, "Andrew Newton (andy)" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> <mailto:[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.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 8:38 PM Gould, James <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> JG - This is an unnecessary step to fulfil the undefined goal in RST 2.0 
>>> and the
>> Next Round Registry Agreement.
>> 
>> 
>> Setting aside this incorrect assertion, if you don't like the "provisional"
>> registrations then another solution is to use a URI like "file:///dev/null" 
>> in I-Ds
>> and have IANA assign the URN at publication time according to the provisions 
>> of
>> RFC 3688 via a note in the IANA considerations section to both IANA and the
>> RFC editor (for changing examples). This means I-Ds would not be registered
>> until publication.
>> 
>> 
>> -andy
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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]

Reply via email to