> So to me this suggests you have a solution allready in
> place for (1) and operational the closely mirrors raw
> registry API (thus previously mentioned value adds and
> adressing (2)).
Nope - OpenHRS instantiations are completely separate and slightly
different from OpenSRS. To be completely crude about it (boy is
marketing going to hate this characterization) The difference between
HRS and SRS is that HRS gets you Administrative Access to the backend
and puts you in control of your own problems (compliance, UDRP,
transfers, etc.)
Or put another way, OpenHRS does nothing to address our current problems
around transparency and perceived commitment to the technical issues
that you and others have been outlining.
We're in the process of outlining what needs to get done (based on a ton
of feedback from here, there and everywhere) and we will publish that
plan when we're done. This will only get taken care of if we do the
initial heavy lifting and put you guys in a position to get productive.
-rwr
"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright
Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 12:52 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Feature Request: SOAP or XML-RPC API
>
>
> >Already handled - any of our resellers can point their
> >current
> >installation at an OpenHRS instance and be up and running
> >on their own
> >tag. A new service contract is required and the fees
> >payable are
> >different, but in a lot of respects, it is like getting
> >your own OpenSRS
> >(and all of the back-end knobs and dials to go with it).
> >We first
> >launched this in 2001 - since then quite a few registrars
> >have bought
> >into the product...
>
> Ok, now I'm really confused. This sounds to me like you're
> saying the "API" has allready been abstracted into a
> different presentation which is more "registry like", but
> with a different payment model.
>
> So why is'nt this unified across all users? Tucows has
> allready accepted responsibilty for producing a turn key
> client (witness the PERL code) and thus "the problem" that
> exists seem to be,
>
> 1) Design Limitations of that current (PERL/OpenSRS)
> system
>
> 2) No cross platform ("agnostic") support
>
> So to me this suggests you have a solution allready in
> place for (1) and operational the closely mirrors raw
> registry API (thus previously mentioned value adds and
> adressing (2)).
>
