Hi Jorge, Antoin, Jim, I would like ten minutes, presented by me, on draft-ranjbar-regext-rdap-subordinate-referrals-01, https://www.google.com/url?q=https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ranjbar-regext-rdap-subordinate-referrals/&source=gmail&ust=1791562699048000&sa=E .
The part worth the room's time is not the draft by itself but its relationship to draft-ietf-regext-rdap-referrals, now at -04. When Andy opened issues 11 and 12 on that repository in July, defining the rdap-base family of relations and a no-redirects extension, he described more or less the ground my -01 already covers, since -01 adopts Jasdip's rdap-base-down and rdap-base-up split and references a no-redirects control. Those two issues have been open since 18 July, and I think the room can close the question faster than the repository will. So the ask is a decision rather than a presentation. Either the subordinate-resource case folds into the referrals draft and my draft becomes the applicability text, or it stays separate because the holder-designated case is doing something the redirect model is not, and we say plainly which. I am happy to argue for either. What I want to avoid is leaving it to drift through another revision of both documents. Kaveh On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 04:33 PM, Jorge Cano <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > It’s time to schedule our session for IETF 127 in San Francisco. > > We have requested a 90-minute time slot. If you would like to add an > item to the agenda, please respond to this message. > > Please note that Alessandro Bertoldi has already submitted a request. > > Best regards, > Your co-chairs. Antoin, Jim, and Jorge. > _______________________________________________ > 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]
