To:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
cc:
"'Joe Abley'" <jabley@isc.org>, <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Rick Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>
Date:
Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:38:12 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:
<3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60337033B@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: "ok" status on domains (and other objects)
There are more pressures than can be percieved for these drafts to be published. We move should forward with what we have and work on interoability and publishing a BCP on running EPP based name registries. -rick On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: > > I think the spec needs to be well-done before it is published as an > > RFC. At the moment it seems medium-rare. > > I disagree for the very reasons cited by Ed. We're bound to uncover issues > as people gain additional implementation experience, but that's the whole > reason that the IETF has a process for moving to "proposed" and "draft" > standard status. Plus, given that multiple other implementers have > developed software to earlier (and ongoing) versions of the specs without > raising the "concerns" that you have, I'd say "medium-rare" is a > mischaracterization. > > -Scott- >