Patrick, I support this fix. Fixing an invalid XML schema is a perfectly legitimate change to draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees, that we needs to be done ahead of it moving forward. I don't see why there would be an issue with fixing this or any other invalid content (e.g., invalid XML examples). — JG
James Gould Distinguished Engineer jgo...@verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> On 11/6/18, 12:21 PM, "regext on behalf of Patrick Mevzek" <regext-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of p...@dotandco.com> wrote: On Sun, Nov 4, 2018, at 16:35, Roger D Carney wrote: > A small updated was needed, implementers found the "standard" attribute > was not at the correct level in the commandDataType. As expected and said previously, this late addition without any clear support from anyone except the initial requestor, will create interoperability problems. I will not rehash the issue but I am not surprised and I will continue to think that this fee extension misses the goal of best compromise possible between features really needed by a common subset of actors and the complexity needed to encode all those features. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com _______________________________________________ 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
