To:
Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
cc:
Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap@nlnetlabs.nl>, iesg@ietf.org, EPP Provreg <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Bernie Hoeneisen <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>
Date:
Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:22:18 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To:
<a06240800c78c98528aab@[10.31.200.142]>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] RE: Last Call: draft-gould-rfc4310bis (DomainName System(DNS) Security Extensions Mapping for the ExtensibleProvisioningProtocol
Hi Scott, Ed, Jaap et al. Thank you all for your views and feedback on this discussion. Concerning the observation I brought to attention, Ed's email hits the nail on the head (copied right below): On Mon, 1 Feb 2010, Edward Lewis wrote: > Since the closing of the WG the documents defining EPP have been advanced to > Full Standard using the mailing list as the basis for communication. While > this meets with IETF processes standards, the registration industry/community > grew both in population[0] and in scope[1] at the same time and this did not > feed into the IETF process. Members of this growth had no formal way to know > of the mailing list as it had no WG to "cover" it, had no chairs or advocates > to promote it in appropriate venues (like CENTR Tech). Have a nice day! cheers, Bernie -- http://ucom.ch/ Tech Consulting for Internet Standardization -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to ietf-provreg-request@cafax.se