To:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
Andrew Sullivan <andrew@ca.afilias.info>
Date:
Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:37:54 -0400
Content-Disposition:
inline
In-Reply-To:
<046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF07C92974@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
Mail-Followup-To:
Andrew Sullivan <andrew@ca.afilias.info>,ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Reply-To:
Andrew Sullivan <andrew@ca.afilias.info>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mutt/1.5.9i
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] Comments: draft-sullivan-epp-experience
Hi Scott,
Thanks for your comments. I particularly like this one:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:05:14AM -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> extension candidacy. The question, of course, is breadth of appeal. We
> should talk about it if others think that more granularity should be
> added to the core. We should defer to an extension if the appeal is
> limited.
That's exactly the feedback I've been hoping for. If there's broad
consensus that the proposals are ill-conceived or not general enough,
I think that the extension mechanism is the way to go, also.
Thanks much,
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@ca.afilias.info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x4110