Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP to Draft: Next Steps

[janusz <janusz@ca.afilias.info>]

Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>My barometer for version change has always been schema change.  Change
>the schema, change the version number.  This situation presents a bit of
>a problem, though, because the text change can definitely have an impact
>on server software that deals with extensions.
>  
>

Impact on EPP clients could be used as addtional measurement tool for 
version number changes.  EPP client implementations should outnumber 
server implementations by very wide margin.
 

>I don't know which solution is appropriate in this case, so I'll ask:
>what would be the impact to existing extension implementations if the
>domain, host, and contact version numbers were incremented?  What would
>other implementers prefer to do?
>
>
>  
>
Impact on existing client EPP implementations can be avoided or limited 
if version number stays the same. If version number is upgraded then 
client changes are necessary.

Server changes are required regardless whether version is upgraded or 
not. The scope of server changes is larger in case when version number 
is incremented.

Cheers,

Janusz Sienkiewicz