[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: "Brian W. Spolarich" <briansp@walid.com>
Cc: "James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>, "Kent Crispin" <kent@songbird.com>, <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From: Martin Oldfield <m@mail.tc>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:10:36 +0000 (GMT)
In-Reply-To: <IPEMICCPDPPICMIONJIOEEPDCBAA.briansp@walid.com>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: draft-hollenbeck-grrp-reqs-06 [Was Re: Interim Meeting]

>>>>> "Brian" == Brian W Spolarich <briansp@walid.com> writes:

--> snip <--


    Brian> 3.4 Object Registration

    Brian>   [1] Protocol MUST support registration of objects of
    Brian>   multiple types,
    Brian> including domain names, nameservers, and domain contacts.

I think saying objects here is a great improvement. However, to be
pedantic if I wanted to set up a registry for pet registrations then I 
wouldn't want it to include any domain names.

Would it be possible to explicitly cast the thing in two halves: the
one is general and says `Protocol MUST support registration of objects
of multiple types'; the other is domain specific and says `The objects
supported must include domain names, nameservers, and domain
contacts'.

Then if people want to set up all sorts of other crazy registries
there's a clear point-of-departure.

--> snip <--

Cheers,
-- 
Martin Oldfield,
AdamsNames Ltd.


Home | Date list | Subject list