To:
Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com>
cc:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se, brunner@nic-naa.net
From:
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date:
Tue, 19 Feb 2002 12:17:45 -0800
In-Reply-To:
Message from Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com> of "Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:51:38 EST." <v0313030db89815ea81ec@[199.171.39.21]>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Call for agenda items for Minneapolis
From the abstract: > These two new parameters only apply to ... <a single domain name registry> and from the statement of intent: > ... specify ... extensions ... required ... interconnect ... registry The authors have created a registry-private extension, as other registries have for trademark data, and no doubt will continue to experiment with as the registry experience matures. Such things are properly in operational registry practices documents, or informational I-Ds, not requiring working group change control and process. I would have said the same thing six weeks ago. Eric