To:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
cc:
"Klaus Malorny" <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se, brunner@nic-naa.net
From:
Eric Brunner-Williams at a VSAT somewhere (or in Portland Maine) <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date:
Mon, 03 Oct 2005 08:21:56 -0400
Content-ID:
<11965.1128342115.1@nic-naa.net>
In-Reply-To:
Your message of "Mon, 03 Oct 2005 08:35:19 EDT." <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF07E84C15@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] RE: XML Namespaces, Prefixes & EPP compliance
> Not really an EPP violation, but it does sound like a violation of the > normative XML references We sort of visited this when (a) we had the schema breakage proposal from the .us operator, and (b) we had the rucus over the do-not-publish binary toggle, which also wasn't expressed in valid XML. EPP is specified in XML. Break it and whatever you've got isn't EPP. my two beads worth. Eric