if possible and palatable, recharting RegExt still looks better to me. And this is orthogonal to the ICANN risk that has been mentioned, which can be addressed by not obsoleting or updating EPP RFCs, as they are the ones mentioned in the gTLD agreements.
Rubens > Em 24 de jul. de 2024, à(s) 21:59, Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries> > escreveu: > > Hi, > > I said that we heard 2 paths forward: > > - recharter / expand existing charter > - new working group > > If you feel strongly about this topic, I welcome any comments on this list or > to me or the chairs privately. > > There seems to be energy to do this work, I'll work with you all to find the > right approach. > > Thanks to the authors and chairs for the presentation in today's meeting. > > Regards, > > OS, ART AD > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 3:35 PM Maarten Wullink <maarten.wull...@sidn.nl > <mailto:maarten.wull...@sidn.nl>> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Thank you all, for the comments and suggestions during our discussion >> earlier today about RESTful EPP. >> The Area Director suggested we create a new working group for this and >> similar work. >> >> If you are interested in joining us, to discuss and write a concept charter >> for this new WG, we have organised a side meeting for this on Thursday. >> Online participation is also an option, the URL will be added to the wiki >> shortly. >> >> Room: Tennyson >> Time: 1300-14:00 >> URL: https://wiki.ietf.org/en/meeting/120/sidemeetings >> >> Best, >> >> Maarten >> > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
