Re: Back to the drawing board, was Re: Last Call: Registry Registrar Protocol (RRP) Version 1.1.0 to Informational

[Patrik F�ltstr�m]

--On 2000-01-05 02.37 -0800, Ed Gerck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> What we have in the
> proposed RFC is thus an outdated spec -- problems that were actually
> reported *solved* in the March-October 1999 timeframe appear again
> *unsolved* in the December 1999 timeframe.

In real life, I have not checked whether NSI really _uses_ what we talked 
about in the timeframe March-October, and in some cases (timestamps for 
example) it is already clear that they use what is specified in the I-D and 
NOT what the RAB proposed, i.e. what is in the email archives of RAB.

So, in what order the specifications were created have nothing to do with 
what we are checking today. We are checking the I-D with what is used. 
Nothing else.

Have you been using the protocol that is in use today?

If not, I ask myself how you can state that the protocol is different from 
what is specified in the I-D.

    paf