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

To: Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>
cc: ietf-provreg@cafax.se, brunner@nic-naa.net
From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 07:21:00 -0500
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:35:11 EST." <a05111b11ba855c0d444f@[]>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] our meeting slot in SF

This is an issue-reminder, assuming that the IESG is responsive on the
privacy/data colleciton issue.

mappings over transports other than tcp.

The IESG claim is that commands cannot be reordered, which seems to be
reasonable for the transformational subset of epp commands, but not the
informational subset of epp commands, and this "resonability" appers to
be limited to com/net/org/info/biz/name transactions. Email is used, as
a transport for XML and BNF, elsewhere. Non-interoperation by intent is
an odd proposition, particularly by non-implementors and non-operators.

The IESG claim is also that applications protocols must provide congestion
control. I'm afraid this new requirement seems reflexive, not the product
of actual reflection on the deployment of epp. The publication protocols
commonly in use with registry provisioning include UDP, with absurdly large
difference in scale. Connectionism by design is an odd proposition too,
again by non-implementors and non-operators. It would be reasonable if this
work were within the ITU, which is both connectionist and mandarinist.

Just out of curiosity, since whois is such a problem, why on earth is the
inferred provisioning of social data to the com/net/org et alia whois
servers not _historic_? The US DCA is very, very, dead as an Agency of
Notice or Fashion.


Home | Date list | Subject list