On Tue, May 29, 2018, at 19:40, Justin Mack wrote:
> Just about everyone else uses EPP 0.4 or EPP 1.0, with notable
> exceptions of RRI (.DE) and TMCH for the Trademark Clearinghouse.
If you want to list everything that looks like EPP but is not EPP,
you could list .IE too.
However I think this is unrelated: the protocol and the transport should be
orthogonal.
The protocol should specify some properties it needs (RFC 5730 for EPP, section
2.1 that should probably be the starting point of all endeavours to define new
transports for EPP), and then it should work with any transport having those
properties. Both "parts" should be able to evolve/be swapped independently as
long as the contract (the common set of properties agreed upon) remains valid.
As for EPP, each new transport should have a specification like it is done in
RFC 5734 for TLS.
--
Patrick Mevzek
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
