To:
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
Cc:
"'EPP Provreg'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
Date:
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 07:42:05 +0200
Authentication-Results:
ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
In-Reply-To:
<20100115034356.GB59651@shinkuro.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] a question for the list
On 15 jan 2010, at 05.43, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > I'd like to know what > problem we have that is actually going to be solved. From my perspective, there are too many extensions out there. A WG should: - Compile a list of extensions that are developed and used by registries - Evaluate whether any of those implies changes are needed to the core protocol - If changes are needed, roll those into the protocol itself All to make epp better and easier to use. It is not fun at the moment. Patrik -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to ietf-provreg-request@cafax.se