Re: [regext] OK, What Next? (was RDAP Extensions Approach Analysis v2)

Good Afternoon, Thanks Jim and Rick, I agree that option B looks like the best collaborative option. Thanks Roger From: regext on behalf of Rick Wilhelm Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 11:37 AM To: Gould, James ; mario.loffr...@iit.cnr.it ; shollenbeck=40veris

Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai Path Forward

+1 on cardinality of one From: regext on behalf of Dmitry Belyavsky Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 7:03 AM To: Gould, James Cc: regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai Path Forward Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please d

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-00.txt

Good Afternoon, In addition to those items that Patrik mentioned, we have been discussing, off list with several people, a couple issues around: the 48 hour timing requirement/reference, the use of for expiring, TCNs being generated twice daily and the verifications/validations required by r

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-reseller-00.txt

Good Afternoon, Just to clarify, the Thick WHOIS Policy will make the Reseller Name output for WHOIS consistent with current contracts and the field will be optional. Thanks Roger From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Levac Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 3:04 PM To:

Re: [regext] Call for agenda items for Berlin

Good Morning, Unfortunately I will not be able to make Berlin, but Jody Kolker will be coming in my place and he can talk to these items: We would like to get these internet drafts on the agenda for Berlin (maybe 15-20 mins for all and most of that is hopefully Q&A): * Validate - https

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-rdap-status-mapping-01.txt

+1 From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gustavo Lozano Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 1:54 PM To: Andrew Newton ; Gould, James Cc: Registration Protocols Extensions Subject: Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-rdap-status-mapping-01.txt +1 Regards, Gustavo Fr

Re: [regext] draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay

Good Afternoon, Interesting question Jim. It seems like it would be a benefit to most of the stakeholders to have a licensing statement included prior to moving forward. Why would we not include the statement? I was unable to attend the last meeting, though I did review the minutes and it

Re: [regext] reseller drafts reviews

Good Morning, I think I need to start at the beginning. Why are we wanting this solution? Is there a problem that we are trying to solve with this draft? Are registrars asking for this, it seems like a large burden for registrars? As I have mentioned several times before, if this is a proposed

[regext] Validate Extension (draft-carney-regext-validate-00)

Good Afternoon, During our process of creating this draft we iterated through several possible solutions and the solution we eventually published was mostly to mitigate any concerns of "over loading" the command with more process

Re: [regext] Agenda items for IETF97

Good Morning, Thanks for the draft agenda Antoin! For agenda items I would like to request a couple minutes (probably no more than 10, 5 to introduce 5 for questions) to re-introduce the draft-carney-regext-validate internet-draft, this has been reworked after registry input. We would like

Re: [regext] Meeting in Chicago

Good Morning, I agree with Scott, I would like to see two one hour sessions. In the working session, I would like to propose working on draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-01 (this draft will be published later this week). This has been updated to reflect most of the discussions from the past year a

Re: [regext] Working Session @ IETF 98

Good Morning, I am a bit confused on the reseller drafts. I thought in Seoul we decided to review and comment but to not dedicate WG effort to these drafts? Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gould, James Sent: Friday, M

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-01.txt

...@tango-rs.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 6:11 AM To: regext@ietf.org Cc: gavin.br...@centralnic.com; Roger D Carney Subject: Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-01.txt Hello, On 03/03/2017 23:13, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available fr

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-01.txt

Good Afternoon, Thanks for the review and comments James!!! I think your discussion of Option C is a great starting point for the list. I believe, this current version 01 allows for more flexibility/refinement (being able to request different fees for different domains) then what you descri

Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-02.txt: currency error handling, command wildcard

Good Morning, Thanks for the comments Thomas! I will look at the consistency of the error codes in sections 3.2 and 5.1.1. As far as the text in the "avail" section you mention, I think this was meant as some combination of these items makes it invalid, not necessarily that a single item

[regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees

Good Morning, We had a very productive meeting at our IETF-98 Monday session. A few of the items that we resolved Monday include: * Simplifying the request by removing the from the extension. This is more in line with Option C from last year's discussions. It does eliminate some flex

Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees

Good Morning, Thanks for the note Thomas. We are working on the final edits this week and hope to have a draft posted within the week. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Thomas Corte [mailto:thomas.co...@knipp.de] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 3:25 AM To: Roger D Carney

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-03.txt

Good Afternoon, Here is the update draft document. This should include all of the agreed upon changes from the Chicago meeting (biggest change was the simplification of the call). One topic that was discussed in Chicago (and not resolved) was on the concept of "premium names" and what is

Re: [regext] Proposed Changes to Milestones

Good Morning, Thanks Jim/Antoin for working through all of these documents. I think these updates look good, except for a question on the reseller documents. As I mentioned on list back in March, I thought in Seoul we decided to review and comment but to not dedicate WG effort to these draf

Re: [regext] Proposed Changes to Milestones

go forward in this case would be b) since it does not seem to be applicable to a broad community” Thanks Roger From: Gould, James [mailto:jgo...@verisign.com] Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 11:01 AM To: Roger D Carney ; Registration Protocols Extensions Subject: Re: [regext] Proposed Changes to

Re: [regext] Proposed Changes to Milestones

extension with IANA - path to go forward in this case would be b) since it does not seem to be applicable to a broad community" Thanks Roger From: Gould, James [mailto:jgo...@verisign.com] Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 11:01 AM To: Roger D Carney mailto:rcar...@godaddy.com>>; Registratio

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-04.txt

Good Afternoon, Thanks for the review James, very much appreciated. I will look to incorporate these as much as I can into the next revision (maybe the last revision J). Thanks Roger From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gould, James Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 1:27 PM T

Re: [regext] interim meetings proposal

Good Afternoon, I think this is a great idea and I think this process looks acceptable. I have just one question and one comment. Question: To clarify number 3 below "...chairs will handle administrative tasks...summary...", I assume the summary will be provided by the requester to the cha

Re: [regext] interim meetings proposal

Hi Thomas, Yes, there will be a new version soon, looking like early next week. The pace has been to allow for additional comments. We are in the process of final edits today with peer reviews later this week. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext [mailto:regext-boun.

Re: [regext] interim meetings proposal

Friday, June 23, 2017 8:19 AM To: Jody Kolker Cc: Roger D Carney ; Registration Protocols Extensions Subject: Re: [regext] interim meetings proposal Yes, please, let’s move forward with scheduling a meeting to discuss the fee document on 11 July. Please take the lead. Jim On 21 Ju

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-05.txt

Good Afternoon, Thanks Thomas, I will make sure we get that updated. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Corte Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:03 AM To: regext@ietf.org Cc: supp...@tango-rs.com Subject: Re: [regext] I-D Actio

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Afternoon, We held an interim meeting this morning and discussed the current Fee draft document (draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-05). In attendance was Thomas Corte, Jody Kolker, Antoin Verschuren, Alex Mayrhofer, James Galvin, Scott Hollenbeck, Joe Snitker, and Roger Carney. We started by con

[regext] Multiple REGEXT Sessions at IETF Meetings

Good Afternoon, I just wanted to start (continue) the discussion about having two sessions for REGEXT at IETF meetings. As many of you heard me say in Prague, I thought that the extra working session that we had in Chicago was very productive and I would like to see this continue with future me

[regext] TLD Phase Discovery

Good Morning, Coming out of Prague I mentioned that I would post to the list the idea of a Launch Phase Mapping/List feature. I believe the thought was to come up with some way to query the registry for a list of phases and associated dates for a TLD. Are there any thoughts on where/how this m

[regext] Interim Meeting Invite

Good Afternoon, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Wednesday August 23 at 15:00 UTC for 60 minutes. As you may have seen I have recently published new versions of the Fee draft, draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-06 and of the Validate draft draft-ietf-regext-validate-02. Agenda

Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery

Good Morning, To me it seems: 1. That this is somewhat of a corner case. 2. I don't think the current draft of launchphase addresses the issue Thomas is expressing. 3. I don't think there is a need to modify launchphase for this functionality. Sending a separate note to discuss Thomas' is

Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery

Good Morning, Thomas, I think the Fee draft can handle your use case of using launch phase for premium names (a premium string is only available in one phase/subphase combination so if client does not pass phase you should return that one valid combination). Can you provide examples where it

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Afternoon, We held an interim meeting this morning and discussed the current Fee draft document (draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-06) and the Validate draft document (draft-ietf-regext-validate-02). In attendance was Jody Kolker, Antoin Verschuren, Alex Mayrhofer, James Galvin, Dean Farwell, An

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

processed by the sever as a whole. We will look to add clarity to the document. Agreed, there will be some scenarios that this draft will not be able to resolve completely. Thanks Roger From: Karl Heinz Wolf [mailto:khwo...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 3:02 AM To: Roger D Carney Cc

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

, August 24, 2017 8:03 AM To: Roger D Carney ; regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Roger, Thanks for hosting this meeting. Unfortunately, I was not able to participate in the meeting. I include some points below based on review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-06 and the minutes

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

, 2017 2:43 PM To: Roger D Carney ; regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Roger, I don’t believe it is clean to assume the capabilities or desire of the client when the current phase is a quiet period by defaulting the return to the “open” / general registration phase. When

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

te phase details for fee information.)? Does anyone else have thoughts on this rewording? Thanks Roger From: Gould, James [mailto:jgo...@verisign.com] Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 12:22 PM To: Roger D Carney ; regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Roger, It’s not c

Re: [regext] Preparing for IETF 100

Good Morning, I would like to suggest the following agenda items for the working session: * The Validate draft * Registry Mapping and Launch Phase Listing And for updates: * Fee * Validate * Interim Meetings Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Invite

Good Afternoon, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Wednesday October 11th at 15:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to discuss items around the latest versions of the Fee draft and of the Validate draft. Agenda 1. Fee * Confirm Edits (section 3.8 and section 4.0)

Re: [regext] Preparing for IETF 100

te session where the additional time will be dedicated to working items. Any thoughts? Any more agenda items? Jim and Antoin - -- Antoin Verschuren Tweevoren 6, 5672 SB Nuenen, NL M: +31 6 37682392 Op 20 sep. 2017, om 17:55 heeft Roger D Carney mailto:rcar...@godaddy.com>> het volgend

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Afternoon, We held an interim meeting on October 11th, 2017 to discuss the current Fee and Validate draft documents. In attendance was Jody Kolker, Antoin Verschuren, James Galvin, and Roger Carney. Alex Mayrhofer sent his regrets. Agenda: 1. Fee * Confirm Edits (section 3.8 an

[regext] REGEXT Fee Document

Good Afternoon, As mentioned today in the REGEXT face to face meeting at IETF-100 in Singapore, we have two remaining questions open on the current draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees. 1. "avail" attribute meaning on partial return of results, see section 3.9

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Invite

Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Wednesday January 10th at 19:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to discuss items around the latest version of the Fee draft and to introduce a Registry Mapping proposal. Agenda 1. Fee * Discuss appropriate level for , a

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Invite

, this will be the last time to discuss before the document is updated. Thanks Roger From: Antoin Verschuren [mailto:i...@antoin.nl] Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 9:04 AM To: Roger D Carney Cc: regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Invite I will attend too. But so far

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Afternoon, We held an interim meeting today January 10, 2018 and discussed the Fee document. In attendance was James Gould, Jody Kolker, Joe Snitker, Peter Koch, Antoin Verschuren, and Roger Carney. Scott Hollenbeck, James Galvin and Andreas Huber sent their regrets. Agenda: 1. Fee

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Wednesday January 31st at 15:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to focus the discussion around the Registry Mapping proposal. Agenda 1. Introduce the Registry Mapping concepts * Base Mappings * Policy Extens

Re: [regext] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-09.txt

:48 PM To: Jothan Frakes; Gavin Brown; Roger D Carney; Roger D Carney Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-09.txt A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-09.txt has been successfully submitted by Roger Carney and posted to the IETF repository. Name

Re: [regext] WGLC: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees

Thanks Scott, I will take a look at those sections From: regext on behalf of Hollenbeck, Scott Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 9:15 AM To: 'gal...@elistx.com'; 'regext@ietf.org' Subject: Re: [regext] WGLC: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-

Re: [regext] WGLC: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees

Thanks Jim, I will add some text to describe this attribute and look to add an example. From: Gould, James Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 10:15 AM To: Roger D Carney; 'regext@ietf.org' Subject: Re: [regext] WGLC: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/

Re: [regext] Preparing for IETF 101

Good Morning, Things for sending this out Antoin. Yes, I agree that we should meet in London. I think our last meeting showed that trying to combine the regular meeting and a working session does not work. I would like to suggest a 90 minute regular session and a second 60 minute working se

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting (2018JAN31) Notes

Meeting started at 9:04 (UTC-6) Moderated by Roger Carney. Attendees: Roger Carney, James Gould, Antoin Verschuren, James Galvin, Jody Kolker, Joe Snitker Agenda 1. Introduce the Registry Mapping concepts * Base Mappings * Policy Extensions: how a server implements an exten

Re: [regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees

Good Morning, Thanks Jims! I will have a new version posted next week. Thanks Roger From: regext on behalf of James Galvin Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 8:25 AM To: Gould, James Cc: regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fe

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-10.txt

Good Afternoon, This latest draft contains minor changes to the document that came about due to WGLC comments. Thanks Roger From: regext on behalf of internet-dra...@ietf.org Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 4:31 PM To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org Cc: regext@ietf.

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Tuesday June 5th at 16:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to focus the discussion around two topics: Agenda 1. Validate draft (comments, concerns, implementations) 2. Registry Mapping * Continue the lively discu

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

Good Afternoon, +1. We agree that that we should move forward with the current draft-ietf-regext-change-poll draft and move this discussion along another path. Thanks Roger From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gould, James Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:16 AM To: James Ga

Re: [regext] Preparing for Montreal

Good Morning, Do we need to discuss our next documents in our regular meeting slot? For the regular meeting, I would like to give an update from the interim meeting(s). I like the two suggested topics for the working session: Registry Mapping and Poll Messages w/ Unhandled Namespaces

Re: [regext] New Version Notification for draft-gould-carney-regext-registry-00.txt

hursday, May 31, 2018 3:12 PM To: Roger D Carney ; Lin Jia ; James Gould ; Roger D Carney ; Jody Kolker Subject: New Version Notification for draft-gould-carney-regext-registry-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-gould-carney-regext-registry-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Jam

Re: [regext] Potential Topic for IETF-102: RDAP Search Capabilities

Good Morning, For the two hour working session I would suggest three forty minute sessions (in no specific order): * Unhandled Namespaces (Jim Gould) * Registry Mapping (Roger) * RDAP Search and Authentication (Francisco/Scott) Thanks Roger -Original Message- Fro

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

Good Morning, This is great, thanks Jim for the thorough review and comments. We can use this set of items to start our discussions today. Thanks Roger From: Gould, James [mailto:jgo...@verisign.com] Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 12:56 PM To: Roger D Carney ; Registration Protocols Extensions

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting (Validate Draft)

Good Morning, I will be sending out minutes/notes of the Interim meeting later this week. I agree with what Jim proposed during the meeting and here in reference to providing ids for new/existing contacts, as well as the one to one matching of the check/response items. Just for a little color/

Re: [regext] Proposed Revision to our Charter

Good Morning, I agree with those saying this new wording seems a bit broad, what if "...related to the operation of Internet identifier registries..." was changed to "...related to the operation of Internet domain name registration systems"? Thanks Roger -Original Message

Re: [regext] Proposed Revision to our Charter

Roger -Original Message- From: Andrew Newton [mailto:a...@hxr.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 9:45 AM To: Roger D Carney Cc: Registration Protocols Extensions Subject: Re: [regext] Proposed Revision to our Charter On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Roger D Carney mailto:rcar

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting (2018JUN05) Notes

Sorry about the tardiness, please enjoy, see everyone in a couple weeks. Meeting started at 11:06 (UTC-5) Attendees: Roger Carney, James Gould, Jody Kolker, Jim Galvin Agenda 1.Validate draft (comments, concerns, implementations) 2.Registry Mapping a.Continue the lively discussion th

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting (2018JUN05) Notes

y deal with other objects and other extensions. Thoughts? Pieter -- Pieter Vandepitte Product Expert +32 16 28 49 70 www.dnsbelgium.be<http://www.dnsbelgium.be> [DNS_PUNT_Belgium_RGB] From: regext mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of Roger D Carney mailto:rcar...@

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-12.txt

Good Afternoon, This is revision 12 of the Fee document that we discussed last week at IETF-102. This is to address the last few items discussed on list and last week at the F2F meeting. For detailed discussion notes please see document shepherd James Gould's email to the list last Wednesday

Re: [regext] Call for agenda items for Bangkok

Good Morning, I think that that we could still benefit from a work session. With the RDAP Profile completing ICANN public comment in mid October and final publication expected in November, it may be a good time to review and answer (and confirm) any of the technical questions/issues. I also t

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting (2018OCT16)

Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Tuesday October 16th at 16:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to focus the discussion around two topics: Agenda 1. Validate draft (comments, concerns, implementations) - New version to be posted this week. 2. Registry

[regext] FW: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-09.txt

) were updated. At this point, as shepherd, I believe this draft is ready for publication. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: internet-dra...@ietf.org Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 12:57 PM To: Roger D Carney Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-regext-change-poll

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-15.txt

Good Morning, A small updated was needed, implementers found the "standard" attribute was not at the correct level in the commandDataType. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2018 9:31 AM To: i-d-annou...@ietf.o

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting 2018OCT16

Meeting started at 11:03 (UTC-5) Attendees: Roger Carney, Jody Kolker, James Gould, James Galvin, Gurshabad Grover, Rick Wilhelm Agenda 1. Validate draft (comments, concerns, implementations) - New version to be posted this week. 2. Registry Mapping * Continue the lively discussi

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting 2018DEC19

Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Wednesday December 19th at 15:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to focus the discussion around Reporting and if time allows a discussion on the Validate draft. Agenda 1. Reporting Repository

Re: [regext] list of documents to consider for working group adoption

Good Morning, Please add https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-validate/. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of Gould, James Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 10:19 AM To: gal...@elistx.com; regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] list of documents to consid

Re: [regext] AD Review: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-15

Good Morning, Thanks for the review and input Adam. · Abstract updated with some more introductory verbiage. · Updated 1.1 with lower “required” · Updated 3.1 with “that” in place of “which” · Updated 3.4 with “lang” attribute for consistency · Question on 3.

Re: [regext] AD Review: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-15

7:31 AM To: Roger D Carney ; a...@nostrum.com; regext@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees@ietf.org Subject: Re: RE: AD Review: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-15 Roger, In reviewing the items. I provide my feedback embedded within your list, prefixed with “JG – “. — JG [cid:image001.png

Re: [regext] [gtld-tech] EPDP recommendations and EPP

Good Morning, I think I am in agreement with most people on this, that option 3 (or C, whatever it is called) is the best short term solution “define a "convention" that allows the and elements to contain placeholder values, such as: - and XX which pose no data protection issues”. Though

Re: [regext] [gtld-tech] EPDP recommendations and EPP

xt] [gtld-tech] EPDP recommendations and EPP On Fri, Mar 1, 2019, at 15:39, Roger D Carney wrote: > I think I am in agreement with most people on this, that option 3 (or > C, whatever it is called) is the best short term solution “define a > "convention" that allows the and el

Re: [regext] [gtld-tech] EPDP recommendations and EPP

ace). Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of Patrick Mevzek Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 9:55 AM To: regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] [gtld-tech] EPDP recommendations and EPP On Fri, Mar 1, 2019, at 16:22, Roger D Carney wrote: > Thanks for the comments Patrick. I agree

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: Proposed Milestones for the next year

+1 on the milestones -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of James Galvin Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 3:26 PM To: Registration Protocols Extensions Subject: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: Proposed Milestones for the next year As discussed at our last meeting at IETF104 Prague, we nee

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16.txt

Good Afternoon, Per AD comments and list comments I have posted revision 16 to address all comments. Here is the change log for revision 16: Updated per AD review and list comments: several grammar corrections; clarification text added to section 3.4.3 and 3.5; and a schema update for cons

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting 2019MAY30

Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Thursday May 30th at 16:00 UTC for 60 minutes. We plan to focus the discussion around Reporting. Agenda 1. Reporting Repository/Struct

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting 2019JUN11

ttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gould-regext-dataset/> fit in). Thanks Roger From: Roger D Carney Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2019 9:07 AM To: regext@ietf.org Subject: REGEXT Interim Meeting 2019MAY30 Good Morning, I would like to invite everyone to an interim meeting Thursday May 30t

Re: [regext] Registration Protocols Extensions (regext) WG Virtual Meeting: 2019-06-11 CHANGED

Good Morning, Thanks for the nudge Patrick, I had the minutes in my drafts folder from right after the meeting and forgot to get them out before taking off for a couple weeks. I will get these notes cleaned up and sent out today. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf

[regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting (2019JUN11) Notes

Meeting minutes from our quick Interim Meeting on June 11th, enjoy! See everyone in a few weeks. Meeting started at 11:04 (UTC-5) Attendees: Roger Carney (GoDaddy), Gordon Dick (Nominet), Joseph Yee (Afilias) Agenda 1. Reporting Repository

Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-login-security

+1 -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of Hollenbeck, Scott Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 8:19 AM To: gal...@elistx.com; regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-login-security Notice: This email is from an external sender. > -Original Message

Re: [regext] on jcard and jscontact migration

Good Evening, +1 on the transition thoughts, thanks Marc for delving a bit deeper on this topic. Just wanted to make one comment/clarification on one of Andy's questions: "Are there any registries willing to step up and say they'll deploy RDAP if we move to JSContact? Just wanted to add cl

Re: [regext] on RDAP milestones

+1 to extensions of these milestones -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of Wilhelm, Richard Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 7:49 AM To: regext@ietf.org Subject: [regext] on RDAP milestones Notice: This email is from an external sender. Capturing/elaborating on my comments at the m

Re: [regext] on RDAP milestones

Good Morning, Thanks George, I like this thought process. One additional thing I would like to add is the discussions of privacy at a higher level. For those that did not attend the Plenary Wednesday, there were some good privacy presentations and shows that privacy is an issue that needs to

Re: [regext] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16

Good Morning, Thank you for your comments Yoav, please see my responses below. A new version of the draft will be published shortly and will address all of the review comments that needed edits. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Yoav Nir via Datatracker Sent: Saturday,

Re: [regext] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16

Good Morning, Thank you for your comments Stewart, please see my responses below. A new version of the draft will be published shortly and will address all of the review comments that needed edits. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Stewart Bryant via Datatracker mailto:no

Re: [regext] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16

Good Morning, Thank you for your comments Carlos, please see my responses below. A new version of the draft will be published shortly and will address all of the review comments that needed edits. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Carlos Pignataro via Datatracker Sent

Re: [regext] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16

Good Morning, Thank you for your follow-up Carlos, please see my responses below. A new version of the draft will be published shortly and will address all of the review comments that needed edits. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) Sent: Wedn

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-17.txt

Good Afternoon, One last draft to address AD reviews and comments. No scheme changes just verbiage cleanup for an easier more concise read. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: regext On Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org Sent: Friday, September 6, 2019 3:06 PM To: i-d-annou...@ietf

Re: [regext] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16

: Roger D Carney Cc: Carlos Pignataro ; ops-...@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees@ietf.org; regext@ietf.org Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16 Notice: This email is from an external sender. Thanks for making the updates, Roger. I do

Re: [regext] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-18: (with COMMENT)

Good Morning, Thanks for your comments Warren, please see my responses below, a new revision will be published shortly to address issues brought up in this latest round of comments. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker Sent: Sunday, September

Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Good Morning, Thanks for your comments Benjamin, please see my responses below, a new revision will be published shortly to address issues brought up in this latest round of comments. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker mailto:nore...@ietf.or

Re: [regext] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-18

Good Morning, Thanks for your comments Yoav, please see my responses below, a new revision will be published shortly to address issues brought up in this latest round of comments. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Yoav Nir via Datatracker mailto:nore...@ietf.org>> Sent:

Re: [regext] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Good Morning, Thanks for your comments Roman, please see my responses below, a new revision will be published shortly to address issues brought up in this latest round of comments. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker mailto:nore...@ietf.org>>

Re: [regext] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-18: (with COMMENT)

Good Morning, Thanks for your comments Eric, please see my responses below, a new revision will be published shortly to address issues brought up in this latest round of comments. Thanks Roger -Original Message- From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker mailto:nore...@ietf.org>> Sent:

Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-01 draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping-01

+1 From: regext On Behalf Of Joseph Yee Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 2:29 PM To: Jothan Frakes Cc: Owen Smigelski ; James Galvin ; Registration Protocols Extensions Subject: Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-01 draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping-01 Notice: This em

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-19.txt

Good Afternoon, One more update, to address IESG reviews and comments. All changes were just textual for clarity/correctness except one, a non-breaking schema change, requiring the name attribute for the command. Enjoy and have a great weekend!! Thanks Roger -Original Message

  1   2   >