Hi, On 05.03.26 14:26, Gould, James wrote:
The question is not whether creating EPP transports is a good idea, but whether if they are created can they be registered in the EPP Extension Registry. The EPP Extension Registry should not be used as a blocker for the creation of EPP extensions, but simply as a registry to publish the existence of the EPP extensions.
Absolutely agree to that, that using registry as a blocker to (presumably) avoid fragmentation is not acceptable. it's like saying that technological progress shall never happen.
On the other hand rfc5730 handles Transport Mapping Considerations in very distinct way to Protocol Extension Framework, which does not define transports.
To gain transparency over available transport mappings, maybe a small draft to create new registry in the same registry group? If there is no consensus about whether alternative transport mappings should be created at all, why WG adopted EoH and EoQ drafts in the first place?
Kind Regards, Pawel
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
