I want to acknowledge that the chairs have seen your request to define
the next step.
We are reviewing the issue and will propose something as soon as we can.
Thanks,
Antoin and Jim
On 18 Apr 2018, at 13:04, Gould, James wrote:
In re-reviewing the mailing list thread, as the document
In re-reviewing the mailing list thread, as the document shepherd I'm unsure if
there is consensus on this. The two items discussed on the list include:
1. Location of the element at the object-level () or at
the command-level (). Draft draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-09 moved
the from
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018, at 16:19, Gould, James wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, at 15:09, Gould, James wrote:
> > I made the proposal for the optional "standard" attribute with the
> list
> > message
> >
>
Patrick,
On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, at 15:09, Gould, James wrote:
> I made the proposal for the optional "standard" attribute with the list
> message
>
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/7E6X5xCdt3DhqL7p7CFupm9bAAY/?qid=e4f712bc8e70e4d0a458971928924651)
> on the
I made the proposal for the optional "standard" attribute with the list message
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/7E6X5xCdt3DhqL7p7CFupm9bAAY/?qid=e4f712bc8e70e4d0a458971928924651)
on the thread with Pat Moroney. The description in the proposal was " Add a
new optional “standard”
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018, at 22:24, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-11
I see that this includes some of my latest comments
(but not all of them, for example required attributes still
do
