On 6/19/26 11:44 AM, Gould, James wrote: > We did agree at IETF 121 that the extensions draft shall go through first, > but that was before the extensions draft expanded the Extension Versioning > section to include concrete proposals that is in scope for > draft-ietf-regext-rdap-versioning. That is a mischaracterization. The -00 had sections called "Extension Versioning", "Backwards-Compatible Changes" and "Backwards-Incompatible Changes". The language has been subsequently expanded in the natural course of working group discussion, often using awkward terms such as "successor" and "predecessor" instead of "old version" and "new version" specifically to avoid the conflict with your draft. Section 5.4 proposes nothing new and simply documents how RDAP works today to advise extension authors.
-andy _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
