RFC5730 Section 2.7 describes how to extend the XML data model to create a new EPP extension. and the transport considerations in section 2.1 describe how to create a new transport mapping.
The charter then considers both to be types of an EPP extension, this works for me. but it does seem there is some ambiguity there. Maarten From: regext <regext-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Gould, James Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 7:49 PM To: maarten.wullink=40sidn...@dmarc.ietf.org; regext@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] EPP evolution and the REGEXT charter Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Maarten, The charter refers to EPP extensions, which transports is a form of an EPP extension. RFC 5730 defines the extension points for EPP and includes support for extending the transports based on Section 2.1 “Transport Mapping Considerations”. I don’t believe that there is a need to revise the REGEXT charter to support the additional of new EPP transports. [SAH] Agreed. New transport mappings are just another type of extension as long as they preserve the data model described in RFC 5730. Scott
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
