To:
"Pindar Wong" <pindar@hk.super.net>
Cc:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, "'Paul M. Kane'" <Paul.Kane@REACTO.com>, <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Date:
Wed, 26 Sep 2001 22:33:25 -0700
In-Reply-To:
<004a01c146ea$a394e3e0$0301000a@compaq>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: "opt-in" schema
At 05:23 PM 9/26/2001, Pindar Wong wrote: >If this group doesn't mind, I'll put together something over this long >weekend in Hong Kong, so that we've got something that we can work through >to identify the major issues (e.g. atomicity of what is being >opted-in-to/out-of). Pindar, Paul, Scott, Let me suggest something a little simpler and more general: A mechanism for exchanging "registry-specific parameters" (RSP), with epp knowing nothing at all about the details of the parameter. EPP would just pass them reliably and opaquely. Any meaningful processing of the parameters would depend upon the processing entity's obtaining knowledge about the semantics from some out-of-band mechanism. SO the requirement is for a syntactic place to put multiple, arbitrary RSPs, between EPP participants. This way EPP can be used for the part it MUST participate in, but the details of semantics, such as the concept of "consent" is left out of EPP's sphere of concern. d/ ps. Hi, Pindar. ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com> Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464