> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Newton (andy) <a...@hxr.us> > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2024 6:23 AM > To: regext@ietf.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] using experimental to move items forward > > 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. > > Hi all, > > When I look at the DNSOP working group I see items like CDS bootstrapping > and generalized NOTIFY are nearing completion. They have even spun off > another working group recently. Comparing that to the progress here, it seems > that in REGEXT we don’t make as much progress. > > Given the different perspectives, I’d like to propose a change in our working > group process inspired by mailmaint [1], sidrops [2], and idr [3]. The basic > proposal is to adopt the SIDROPS/IDR thresholds but with a lower bar for all > RDAP extensions: before publication on the standards track there must be at > least one interoperable server and client implementation documented with an > implementation report published on the working group wiki [4]. Otherwise > the extension may be published as experimental with the proviso that it could > be put back on the standards track once interoperability between a client and > a server is documented. > And in special circumstances, the chairs could waive this requirement. > > Note that in the SIDROPS and IDR examples above, there's nothing in the > working group charter that requires these interoperable implementations. > We might be able to do this in REGEXT without a charter change, too. > Following their lead, we would publish this proposal to the REGEXT wiki [4].
[SAH] This proposal is worth discussing. Can we put it on the agenda for IETF-120? Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
