s modified to accommodate them! > > G. >
> From: Hugo Salgado > Date: Thursday, 2 March 2023 at 14:46 > To: Gavin Brown
> Cc: regext@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-regext-brown-epp-ttl-04.txt > Hi Gavin! It seems to me that t
is extension if it was modified to accommodate them!
>
> G.
>
> From: Hugo Salgado
> Date: Thursday, 2 March 2023 at 14:46
> To: Gavin Brown
> Cc: regext@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for
> draft-regext-brown-epp-ttl-04.txt
&g
of host attribute servers who
would implement this extension if it was modified to accommodate them!
G.
From: Hugo Salgado
Date: Thursday, 2 March 2023 at 14:46
To: Gavin Brown
Cc: regext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-regext-brown-epp-ttl-04.txt
Hi Gavin
Hi Gavin!
It seems to me that there is a case of use that is not being
considered, when the NS and their glues are defined as an attribute
of the domain object, without having a host object.
If we consider a create command with a domain object like the example
1.1 in RFC5731:
Hi all,
With thanks to Rick and Jim for their feedback, I’ve uploaded a new version of
the TTL extension draft, which incorporates their suggestions.
I’ve asked the WG chairs for a slot at IETF116 to present this draft and
request WG adoption.
Feedback and advice gratefully appreciated!
G.
