Hi Folks, I'd like to provide a bit of background as to why I believe this is coming up. CIRA is going through ICANN RSP evaluation for Round 2. (and so is SIDN)
As part of that, one of the requirements is that your IDN EPP extension must be registered with the IANA EPP Extension Registry. https://www.iana.org/assignments/epp-extensions/epp-extensions.xhtml Now for years I think many organizations, CIRA included, have been using the draft idnmap-02 as our basis for our IDN EPP implementation. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02 In previous RST testing for ICANN we just referenced the DRAFT RFC and everything was fine. But now ICANN is saying It must be registered in the EPP Extension Registry. And I assumed earlier on that at some point that DRAFT made it to RFC and was registered. But found out it wasn't. In order to move forward with Round 2 RST Testing, we need to be able to reference an EPP Extension in the table. We are in the process of writing up a new CIRA IDN EPP Extension which is derived from idnmap-02 and submit it for entry into the registry. Much like Identity Digital did. But realistically from a global point of view, it would be nice if the original DRAFT would move forward into full RFC and be submitted. Or even if you can submit the draft itself. (I'll be honest I'm not sure exactly what the rules are there.) That way we don't end up with a bunch of Backend Registry Operator specific EPP extensions (all based off of idnmap-02) in the registry, just to meet this requirement. Thoughts? Thanks, Don CLASSIFICATION:CONFIDENTIAL -----Original Message----- From: Maarten Wullink <[email protected]> Sent: August 14, 2025 9:58 AM To: Francisco Obispo <[email protected]> Cc: REGEXT Working Group <[email protected]> Subject: [EXT] [regext] Re: idnmap extension Hi Francisco, As one of the authors, can you maybe elaborate a bit on why this document never reached RFC status? Would you mind if I or somebody else continues this document with the goal of getting it published as an RFC? Best, Maarten > Op 13 aug 2025, om 15:57 heeft Francisco Obispo <[email protected]> het > volgende geschreven: > > Hi Marteen, > > Tucows Registry Services (TRS) is actively using it. > > Best, > > On 13 Aug 2025, at 8:33, Maarten Wullink wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Has any other registry implemented the idnmap [1] extension? >> It’s currently only an expired draft, but we use it and are considering >> pushing it toward RFC status. >> Knowing of other deployments would help make the case. >> >> - >> Maarten >> >> >> >> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap-02 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email >> to [email protected] _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
