Il 07/02/2017 12:55, Antoin Verschuren ha scritto:
Dear working group,
Scott has sent this question to the mailinglist almost a month ago, and so far
there has not been one reaction.
The chairs believe that the RDAP drafts Scott suggested fall within the charter
of this working group, as RDAP extensions are part of our charter.
But we do need sufficient participation for review for us to take documents
onboard.
That’s not only true for these documents, but for all documents already in our
charter.
When we rechartered, we had sufficient voiced support for review of documents,
but it seems not all subjects share the same interest over time.
No interest in a specific solution also needs advise on why it’s not needed or
a bad idea.
So I have a number of questions for you:
1. Do we have any volunteers to review these RDAP documents?
For us to do a good job in progressing existing and adopting new documents, we
need reviewers and expert advise.
We realize that this is a small working group and most of us only concentrate
on issues at hand we encounter ourselves.
For us to take on RDAP documents since we rechartered, I have the following
questions:
2. Could we identify the organizations that have or are implementing RDAP so we
can motivate them in participating if they don’t already?
At nic.it we have developed a RDAP server prototype implementing both
search-regex and object-tag extensions.
We are currently working on authentication and access levels.
The prototype implements also other extensions about search queries that
we would like to propose to the working group for a feedback and a
possible standardization.
At the moment the prototype is not accessible but we really hope it will
be in a short time.
Anyway we can show it in a demo.
Mario
3. Could we make a list of implementations, published/intended policy proposals
and RDAP toolkits?
3. If you are aware of RDAP implementers or policy reviewers not aware of this
working group, could you please motivate them in participating?
It’s needles to say that by the time your organization needs to implement the
products of this working group, the time to complain about improper design has
passed, and we hope you can convince your staff and management that the time to
invest in proper design is now, before you start implementing at scale.
If we fail do do proper review within this working group, the risk is that the
early adopters will make individual submissions for the protocol adjustments
they need without consulting the needs of others in this field for the future,
and would give us much more work afterwards to restore, or even failure of or
criticism on our industry diversity.
Regards,
- --
Antoin Verschuren
Tweevoren 6, 5672 SB Nuenen, NL
M: +31 6 37682392
Op 12 jan. 2017, om 19:36 heeft Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenb...@verisign.com>
het volgende geschreven:
Is anyone interested in reviewing a pair of drafts that I shared on-list a few
weeks ago? Both address gaps in RDAP functionality and could actually be useful
in production environments:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fregly-regext-rdap-search-regex/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag/
My team has working prototypes up and running and we are very interested in
your feedback. If there's interest we'd like to ask the WG to consider them for
adoption.
Scott
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
--
Dr. Mario Loffredo
Servizi Internet e Sviluppo Tecnologico
CNR - Istituto di Informatica e Telematica
via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy
E-Mail: mario.loffr...@iit.cnr.it
Phone: +39 050 3153497
Web: http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
