Hi James,
I think your summation is better than what we have in Section 1.1. We'll
work to incorporate this and make other changes.
Many thanks for your contribution and review.
WRT to other extensions types, I am unfamiliar with any others.
-andy
On 10/8/24 16:00, Gould, James wrote:
Jas
We agree. :)
Jasdip
From: Hollenbeck, Scott
Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 at 12:30 PM
To: Jasdip Singh , a...@hxr.us , regext@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [regext] Re: Extension Identifiers in
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search
From: Jasdip Singh
Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 11:54 AM
To: Holl
Yes, we do, but I would still like to request that the shepherd writeup include
a description of the situation with respect to the extension identifiers and
non-conformance with Standard 95 as noted below. It would be perfectly
acceptable to note that only one person raised the concern. My comme
From: Andrew Newton (andy)
Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 11:47 AM
To: regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: Comments Regarding
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions-04
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you
From: Andrew Newton (andy)
Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 11:41 AM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Extension Identifiers in
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click
links or open a
Hi.
Andy and I have penned a new draft entitled “An RDAP Extension for RPKI
Registration Data”. We’ll present it in regext at the next IETF, and then
request for adoption. Please review when convenient.
Thanks,
Jasdip
From: internet-dra...@ietf.org
Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 at 4:39 PM
inline
On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 4:28 PM Hollenbeck, Scott
wrote:
> *From:* Joseph Yee
> *Sent:* Friday, October 4, 2024 9:29 AM
> *To:* regext@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-regext-epp-eai-22.txt
>
>
>
> *Caution:* This email originated from outside the org
Mario,
Snipping a bunch of stuff :)
...
On 10/9/24 03:53, Mario Loffredo wrote:
Hi Andy,
But, provided that some custom and standard specifications allow a
server to return response extensions by itself, I do believe that the
document should clarify what the server is expected to do when
Scott,
Glad to know that you are not against the
use-extension-id-as-segment-for-child-segments approach, beside the
prepend-extension-id-and-underscore approach from STD 95.
Re: “The “domains” collision is an issue. We can deal with it now, or during
IETF last call.”
AFAICT, it is not an iss
Scott,
This was discussed in this working group on this list by me and others.
I even proposed something similar. However, absent some functional
deficiency or harm, I do not favor re-opening this issue post WGLC. It
may not have been the way I would have done it, but to my knowledge it
works
On 10/8/24 11:12, Jasdip Singh wrote:
[SAH] Yes, that's what I'm advocating for. I'd rather change the
non-conforming Proposed Standard extensions than update an Internet
Standard to validate them. Updating the Proposed Standard will be far
more disruptive than updating the optional extensio
From: Jasdip Singh
Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 11:54 AM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; a...@hxr.us; regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Re: Extension Identifiers in
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click
links or
That’s fair, Scott.
BTW, so would be Reverse Search, until the Extensions draft updates STD 95
vis-à-vis the additional use-extension-id-as-segment-for-child-segments
approach.
Jasdip
From: Hollenbeck, Scott
Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 at 3:30 PM
To: Jasdip Singh , a...@hxr.us , regext@i
In another thread focused on the extensions draft, I was asked "Would you like
regext to revisit Reverse Search?" That prompted me to take another look at the
draft. It currently defines five extension identifiers (two for path segments,
two for result data structures, and one for something else
Hi Andy,
again my comments below.
Il 07/10/2024 13:44, Andrew Newton (andy) ha scritto:
On 10/4/24 04:44, Mario Loffredo wrote:
[ML] I was talking about "unrequested extensions" which can be
different from "unknown extensions". I remind you that:
1) some custom extensions reported in the R
15 matches
Mail list logo
