Re: Fw: WG Review: Provisioning Registry Protocol (provreg)

["James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>]

Dave,

> At 08:41 PM 2/2/2001 +0800, James Seng/Personal wrote:
> >I would like to object this proposed charter for provreg. Its scope
has
> >been so specific defined for DNS only and has no mention of anything
> >beyond DNS.
>
> feature, not bug.

It depends who you speaking to...To me, it is a bug.

> start with a narrow focus.  do something useful quickly.  then come
back
> and expand the scope.
>
> The more general the scope, the longer the cycle to delivery something
useful.

I agree.

However, I can not understand is what is the hurry for the WG to get
this out quickly?

If it is about new gTLD registry, any of the new gTLD registry who have
not started work implementing their system now is crazy. I dont think
any of them will wait for the result of the WG (Sept?) before starting
work. For this, we are already too late.

If it is just pure market pressure to have this, well, the answer is
fairly simple. Different registries are already using different system
ranging from taking it via by hand, by email, by webpage, to more
automated one, RRP or some variant of RRP.

For those high-tech ones which uses automated system, moving to a new
standard takes a lot of time so it wont happen overnight. For those
still on low-tech, investment to create whatever specify here is going
be very high for them which means potential opportunity for those who
can get a solution to them.

Either way, IMHO, we are already too late in a non-standardised world.
Hence, it is better to work on a GOOD and long term technical solution
then something half-baked push out quickly for an immediated need which
no longer exist.

Am I missing something?

-James Seng