Hi Tobias,
let me disagree with you about some conclusions. My comments are inline.
Il 25/01/2019 23:05, Tobias Sattler ha scritto:
Hi everyone,
After seeing the result of the vote, I, as a representative of a domain
registrar, must express my serious concern about the RDAP Reverse Search
do
Hi everyone,
After seeing the result of the vote, I, as a representative of a domain
registrar, must express my serious concern about the RDAP Reverse Search
document.
A reverse search enables third parties to query RDAP, among other things, so
that all associated domains can be queried using
The DOODLE was officially closed Friday. There was additional person
who selected documents bringing the total number of contributors to 21.
The additional selections did not material change the ranking of the
choices.
Based on raw numbers, the following 5 documents are preferred:
14 Federa
This is the final reminder. The poll will close today.
With 20 participants indicating preferences, I can say that RDAP is the
clear winner. More folks care about RDAP options than about
registry-registrar options.
Here are the top 5 so far (highest to lowest) based on raw numbers:
Federat
Hello Alexander,
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019, at 03:25, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
> Jim,
>
> thanks for posting that - i've made my choices.
>
>
For the record, I share most if not all of your rant Alexander.
1) I am sad to see this working group and the IETF being a rubberstamp for
documents dis
Thanks to all those who have indicated their document preferences.
This is a reminder we will close the poll tomorrow, so if you haven’t
indicated your preferences please do so.
Currently, there is a small set at the top of the list. More than 5,
although there is a pretty clear top two.
T
I don't view the need for the concrete report formats to be defined as
standards track RFCs, but instead define an IANA registry for the report
formats (e.g., common and optionally proprietary) based on a set of underlying
RFCs (format and report interfaces(s)). This is similar to what has been
Just to round things up ;-)
We had talked to the registries about our proposals from the beginning. It
quickly became clear that they would never implement anything that was not RFC.
Which is why we had to make these submissions at all. It would be a real feat
to say now that these are still dr
Hello Tobias,
trying to settle that with a few last words:
> I think we're more or less on the same page.
[AM] Good to hear. I do agree that we have the same goal, only our paths differ
:)
> Just so we don't misunderstand each other: It's not that we or I don't
> appreciate the work on polic
Hi Alex,
I think we're more or less on the same page.
Just so we don't misunderstand each other: It's not that we or I don't
appreciate the work on policies or even want to deliberately avoid them.
However, they essentially refer to framework conditions only and not to
explicit technical impl
Tobias,
Thanks for coming back to my "rant". A few observations inline:
> However, nowadays most domain registries have withdrawn to the point of
> implementing only their own ideas or approved RFCs. This inevitably leads to
> the situation that proposals for improvement - whoever they come from
, but we should carefully select
> the right venues.
>
>
>
> Best,
> Alex
>
>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: regext Im Auftrag von James Galvin
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Dezember 2018 17:13
>> An: Registration Protocols Extensions
>&g
rsprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: regext Im Auftrag von James Galvin
> Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Dezember 2018 17:13
> An: Registration Protocols Extensions
> Betreff: [regext] DOODLE: select your documents
>
> Please take the time to select the documents you suppor
our
best to do the same.
Thanks,
Jim
On 2 Jan 2019, at 9:55, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
-Original Message-
From: regext On Behalf Of James Galvin
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2018 11:13 AM
To: Registration Protocols Extensions
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] DOODLE: select your
> -Original Message-
> From: regext On Behalf Of James Galvin
> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2018 11:13 AM
> To: Registration Protocols Extensions
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] DOODLE: select your documents
>
> Please take the time to select the documents you support
Please take the time to select the documents you support for advancement
in this working group.
https://doodle.com/poll/6nyguby3yr8dx9cp
Please select from 1-5 documents.
If you click once in the box a green check mark will appear. Use this
to indicate support for a document. If you click t
16 matches
Mail list logo
