[ietf-provreg] a question for the list

[Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@Neustar.biz>]

It's been about 7 years since PROVREG WG closed and about 5 years 
since the IETF has taken on a serious amount of registry-related work 
(such as CRISP).  In that time Scott has shepherded EPP's base 
specification to Full Standard.  By comparison, DNS's original RFCs 
have been elevated to Full Standard without the current process, and 
almost no extensions to DNS have progressed even to Draft Standard. 
I say that to highlight the extent of Scott's effort and achievement.

Currently we have a draft proposing an update to RFC 4310 (DNSSEC in 
EPP), I have been asked about "how to submit" another extension. 
There have been a few other extensions published as RFCs.

EPP is also growing in deployments.  Early it was the registration 
protocol for the ICANN shared registry model but it has been 
spreading to other registries that are not subject to ICANN's 
overview.  With less "evidence" on hand, a few registries have had to 
modify something to get an EPP interface.  I suspect that some of the 
extensions have not been published as RFCs (which is fine, but, it 
would be nice).

Based on this, I wanted to ask the audience of this list if they 
thought it would be a good idea to organize a new WG to cover EPP.  A 
new WG would mean another mail list, as well as the other trappings - 
drafts, charter, BoFs, etc.

I can imagine extensions being discussed here, as well as trying to 
promote the existing ones to Draft and Full.  Also, a document that 
discusses what could have been done better in EPP (as maybe a 
requirements to EPP 2.0).

So - the question here is - is there interest?

Ultimately, there are other registry-specific things to discuss these 
days, discussions that currently have no other appropriate home. 
Such as - getting DNSSEC information into a registry in a generalized 
environment.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

As with IPv6, the problem with the deployment of frictionless surfaces is
that they're not getting traction.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
List run by majordomo software.  For (Un-)subscription and similar details
send "help" to ietf-provreg-request@cafax.se