ailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of James Galvin
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 4:15 PM
To:regext@ietf.org <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
The WGLC for this document was scheduled to end today. While there is
eft Hollenbeck, Scott
> het volgende geschreven:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: regext mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org>> On
>> Behalf Of James Galvin
>> Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 4:15 PM
>> To: regext@ietf.org <mailto:regext@ietf.org&g
> -Original Message-
> From: regext On Behalf Of James Galvin
> Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 4:15 PM
> To: regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> The WGLC for this document was scheduled to end today. While
On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 10:46:52AM +0200, Thomas Corte (TANGO support) wrote:
> On 10/7/20 03:17, Tom Harrison wrote:
The question is whether the RDAP protocol should provide guidance
with how to handle overlapping non-unique handles.
>>>
>>> I don't think it should. A Jasdip pointed out
Hello,
On 10/7/20 03:17, Tom Harrison wrote:
>>> The question is whether the RDAP protocol should provide guidance with
>>> how to handle overlapping non-unique handles.
>>
>> I don't think it should. A Jasdip pointed out, the definition of a
>> handle notes that they're supposed to be registry-u
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 04:03:40PM +, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>> The phrase 'registry-unique identifier' connotes a unique lookup
>>> key for entities, irrespective of their type. It puts the onus on
>>> a registry to ensure so. Does that not suffice?
>>
>> There are cases where the entity
> -Original Message-
> From: Gould, James
> Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 11:41 AM
> To: jasd...@arin.net; Hollenbeck, Scott ;
> mario.loffr...@iit.cnr.it; gal...@elistx.com; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-
>
rom: regext On Behalf Of Mario Loffredo
> Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 3:18 AM
> To: James Galvin ; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
>
&g
> To: James Galvin ; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
>
> Il 02/10/2020 22:15, James Galvin ha scritto:
> > The WGLC for this document was scheduled to end today.
Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 3:18 AM
> To: James Galvin ; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
>
> Il 02/10/2020 22:15, James Galvin ha scritto:
> > The WGLC for this document was scheduled
> -Original Message-
> From: regext On Behalf Of Mario Loffredo
> Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 3:18 AM
> To: James Galvin ; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
>
> Il 02/10/2020 22:15, James Galvin ha s
Il 02/10/2020 22:15, James Galvin ha scritto:
The WGLC for this document was scheduled to end today. While there is
support to move the document forward there is one minor comment that
has been raised during the last call.
The chairs would like to hear from other working group members as to
The WGLC for this document was scheduled to end today. While there is
support to move the document forward there is one minor comment that has
been raised during the last call.
The chairs would like to hear from other working group members as to
what to do with this comment. Rather than clos
September 21, 2020 2:27 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; i...@antoin.nl;
> regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> Scott,
>
> Yes, lumping the registrar object with th
t;
wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Gould, James
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 2:27 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; i...@antoin.nl;
> regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> S
> -Original Message-
> From: Gould, James
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 2:27 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; i...@antoin.nl;
> regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> Scott,
>
> Yes, lumping the reg
quot;Hollenbeck, Scott"
wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: regext On Behalf Of Gould, James
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 11:22 AM
> To: i...@antoin.nl; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL:
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: regext On Behalf Of Gould, James
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 11:22 AM
> To: i...@antoin.nl; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> Upon review of draft-ietf-regext-r
Upon review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis, I have the following feedback:
Use of entity lookup for registrar objects was added, but there is no guidance
related to handling entity lookups for different independent object types,
where the object identifier and subsequently the may overlap. An
+1
From: regext on behalf of Mario Loffredo
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 12:49 AM
To: Antoin Verschuren ; regext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
Notice: This email is from an external sender.
+1
Mario
Il 18
+1
Mario
Il 18/09/2020 15:52, Antoin Verschuren ha scritto:
The following working group document is believed to be ready for submission to
the IESG for publication as a standards track document:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis/
This WG last call will end at clos
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:52:44PM +0200, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
> The following working group document is believed to be ready for
> submission to the IESG for publication as a standards track
> document:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
>
> This WG last call w
22 matches
Mail list logo
