Hi Chairs, Regarding the question of what is needed:
We need to go back to the agreement [1] made in a meeting at the Montreal IETF between the authors of these documents and interested parties. At that meeting, everyone agreed to a simple solution, offered by Pawel, that is compatible with how RDAP is deployed today. The crux of the current disagreement is compatibility with RDAP as it is deployed today. While the versioning draft has been a moving target -- now on its third redesign -- each iteration has NOT been compatible with currently deployed RDAP. Regarding logistics: I am available during those times though would prefer an evening meeting because IETF sessions do get moved around. Also, Pawel has been very involved in these discussions and played the part of mediator. It would be unfortunate if he could not be on equal footing in these discussions. Absent an immediate need to meet a deadline, I think a fast-follow, virtual interim meeting would serve us well. -andy, no hats [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/sN-ar484f9n5YgXkTauq7CE6xMk/ On 7/13/26 11:43 AM, James Galvin wrote: > To the principals listed below, please confirm if you wish to be present for > the discussion the Chairs are trying to organize. > > To everyone in the working group, the question the Chairs need to answer is, > “What is needed to move these documents forward?” It may help to think of > this as a pre-working-group-last-call question. > > For anyone who has a question, concern, or a position regarding these > documents, please do send a note to the list with your statement. > > One email message per person, please. Do not respond to each other. > > The Chairs will review all messages and frame the discussion to be had and > propose either a consensus or a specific question for consideration after the > IETF. Again, the goal is to finalize these documents so we can quickly move > forward a number of other documents that are dependent on them. > > > LOGISTICALLY, it seems that Wednesday morning is not going to work for our ad > hoc meeting. Best bets are currently Monday Session III (2-4pm timeslot) or > in the evening on Monday or Tuesday. It would be helpful if the principals > would indicate their availability in those times. > > > Thanks to all. See you next week in person. > > Jorge, Antoin, Jim > > > On 10 Jul 2026, at 18:06, James Galvin wrote: > >> The Chairs have received requests both on list and privately to please help >> facilitate finding a consensus as to how to proceed with these three >> documents. >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions/ >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-x-media-type/ >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-versioning/ >> >> It does seem that there is an impasse, which is unfortunate. However, The >> Chairs remain ever hopeful that we will find a path forward. >> >> What we propose is to get the principals together while we are all present >> in Vienna. The Chairs will prepare an agenda and review concerns and >> preferences among the principals. The objective is for the Chairs to be >> able to identify the rough consensus, if not full consensus, in the room. >> >> The Chairs will provide a summary of the discussion to the list and assert >> the identified consensus for review by the working group. we will be >> looking for objections from other working group members and, of course, ask >> that if you object you provide a technical explanation with new information >> to support it. >> >> The goal is to finalize these documents, or to indicate explicit next steps >> to be completed that will finalize these documents. They have been on our >> milestone list for years and worse they are about two years overdue. >> >> The only meeting slot that we have available to do this is Wednesday >> morning, 22 July, in the first time slot of the day 9am-11am local time. >> Our AD has offered the IESG meeting room for this discussion and it is >> currently reserved for us. Sorry folks, there is no remote participation >> available but we believe this will be okay as we will be reporting to the >> working group for the final decision. >> >> Although anyone is welcome to join, the principals the Chairs would like to >> be present for this discussion are as follows. >> >> Jim Gould >> Tom Harrison >> Paweł Kowalik >> Mario Loffredo >> Andy Newton >> Jasdip Singh >> >> We should appreciate if those on that list would indicate if they are >> available for this discussion. As long as we have a quorum, as determined >> at the discretion of the Chairs and the AD, we will have the discussion and >> report to the mailing list. >> >> If for some reason this meeting cannot happen, then the Chairs will organize >> an interim meeting in the weeks following the IETF. Of course, we’d prefer >> not to do this so please do try to accommodate this meeting in your busy >> schedules. >> >> Thanks to all! >> >> Jorge, Antoin, and Jim > > _______________________________________________ > 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]
