Responding to multiple people....
On 6/17/24 18:40, George Michaelson wrote:
I have two competing views
1) get rid of time-wasting. If documents something novel in
implementations but there are no implementations, it's not very useful
work. Experimental and Informational are kind of different.
2) de-facto VETO from incumbency. I am concerned in other WG this is
being used by what I can only call a "cabal" of friendship, to oppose
things "the bad person" suggests could or should be done.
RE 1) I agree that Informational is different, but this is exactly one
of the use cases for Experimental.
https://www.ietf.org/process/process/informational-vs-experimental/
RE 2) I don't want that, though we do have people who pop up at our
sessions to oppose things without giving a technical reason. I also
don't understand how setting an objective criteria enables a cabal. In
fact, I would think it does the opposite. Also note that I explicitly
lowered the bar set by IDR/SIDROPS. This isn't about gate keeping, but
about getting back to "rough consensus, running code".
On 6/18/24 06:42, Maarten Wullink wrote:
Hi,
+1 for optimizing the process where possible.
But i wonder why this new process is limited to RDAP extensions only?
What is the distinction between RDAP extensions and other work done in REGEXT
such as EPP extensions?
-
Maarten
Because the RDAP extensions seem to be piling up and we seem to have
differing views about their implementations. I think RFC 9537 is a good
example of this... an implementation report would have been very
beneficial as we are now being told the JSONPath portions are completely
optional though the RFC doesn't read that way at all.
But we could extend this to EPP, though I suspect most EPP proposals
would meet this criteria more easily as many of them have both server
and SDK implementations (see the recent EPP TTL draft).
On 6/18/24 04:29, Mario Loffredo wrote:
Hi Andy,
what does it mean "interoperable implementation" in RegExt context ?
Best,
Mario
It means the protocol/extension works as expected. If Bob were to create
a client with extension Foo and Alice were to create a server with
extension Foo, but the expected features of extension Foo did not work
between then they do not interoperate. Of course, "did not work between
them" can be a bit subjective but that is why a written report is
required.... to pull out the ambiguities.
-andy
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
