On 05.10.18 14:05, Niels ten Oever wrote: > On 10/05/2018 01:55 PM, Eliot Lear wrote: >> I take no position on the HR issues of this draft. However: >> >> >>> If there is only one instance in which this MAY be useful, perhaps there >>> is no need for standardization of this extension? >>> >> Not the way we do business. We ask this question on the front end of >> the process, not the back end. > Where is this question baked in the process
As a matter of practice (e.g., running code), it is asked at the time of working group adoption, and it *sh**ould* be a gating factor for technical specifications. That is- no working group is likely to adopt work they think is not going to get implemented or deployed, as that is a waste of the IETF's resources. And in general it comes along with questions like, “Do people think this is a good idea? Has anyone read the draft? Are people willing to review the work? etc.” > Please elaborate? The 'MAY' was brought up by Scott in his previous email. He gave *an* example. You implied then that it was the only use case. That's not reasonable. And there's reason to assume that this is not the case, (a) because of the above and (b) because someone is being paid to do work in this space in this direction, and that person works at a domain registration company. Eliot **
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
