On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 3:57 AM Mario Loffredo wrote:
>
> [ML] I would prefer "only express the items which are more likely used in
> RDAP". After all, SimpleContact is not an RFC and, as such, could be subject
> to changes resulting from the WG discussion.
>
> In this respect, have still retaine
+1
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 9:24 AM Gould, James wrote:
> Jim and Antoin,
>
>
>
> I support having an interim meeting to discuss. I see distinct problems
> being solved by the three drafts draft-gould-regext-rdap-versioning,
> draft-newton-regext-rdap-extensions, and
> draft-newton-regext-rdap-x
Antoin,
I did my review of draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search-05, and below is my
primarily editorial feedback:
1. Section 1.1 “Requirements Language”
* Recommend make this Section 2 “Conventions Used in This Document” for
consistency with the RDAP RFCs. I also recommend defining
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed-00.txt is now available. It is a
work item of the Registration Protocols Extensions (REGEXT) WG of the IETF.
Title: An RDAP Extension for Geofeed Data
Authors: Jasdip Singh
Tom Harrison
Name:draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed-00.
Hopefully you’ve seen the recent note from the Chairs agreeing with
what you’re saying.
Please make a call for adoption on the mailing list to keep the working
group informed. The Chairs will move forward from there.
Thanks!
Antoin and Jim
On 14 Nov 2023, at 18:26, Jasdip Singh wrote:
Reminder,
This WGLC will end tonight. So far we only had 3 notifications of support. (And
a comment from the document shepherd)
Please indicate your support if you didn’t already do so for us to judge
consensus.
Regards,
Your co-chairs Jim and Antoin
> Op 27 nov. 2023, om 15:51 heeft Antoin
Jim and Antoin,
I support having an interim meeting to discuss. I see distinct problems being
solved by the three drafts draft-gould-regext-rdap-versioning,
draft-newton-regext-rdap-extensions, and draft-newton-regext-rdap-x-media-type.
I highlight them below to prime the discussion:
1.
The Chairs have caught up on this thread and have the following proposal
for the working group
We suggest that the working group take on the problem space of
considering negotiation, signaling, and versioning in RDAP.
To properly consider this problem space we should adopt as working group
d
This ACTION REQUEST is now closed.
The Chairs see two take-aways from this working group discussion.
1. We still have support for “jscontact” and we have support for the
Experimental track. However, we don’t believe we are ready to publish yet.
2. While the concepts of signaling vs extension h
This call for adoption closed last week.
We have 9 people that support and no rejections, so the chairs consider this
document adopted.
With this message the chairs ask the authors to submit version 00 of a working
group document, that is the same as the current document, using the following
pr
10 matches
Mail list logo
