Hi Bernie,
Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:
I am a bit puzzeled that according to
https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/draft-gould-rfc4310bis/
draft-gould-rfc4310bis has already been placed on the IESG Telechat
agenda, before the IETF Last Call has even ended.
Did this happen intentionally or by mistake?
Many Area Directors put documents on IESG telechats before IETF Last
Calls are over. In such cases Area Directors assume that any issues will
be settled before the selected telechat date. But a document can be
moved to another telechat or taken off any particular telechat at any
moment.
Please be informed that on the provreg mailing list
http://www.cafax.se/ietf-provreg/maillist/2010-01/maillist.html
there is a heavy discussion going on about the shortcomings of the
current proposal. At least two issues have been identified so far:
1) XML namespace (interoperability issues as with the current proposal
the feature negotiation does not work anymore as defined by the EPP
core spec)
2) need for active / inactive flag (e.g. to mark a DS to be used for
emergency key rollover)
Before these (and other) issues have been resolved, IMHO it does not
make sense to discuss the I-D on the IESG Telechat.
The current proposal is still premature.
Ok, I will make sure the issues are resolved before the document goes to
IESG.
Furthermore due to lack of a Working Group (and lack of an _official_
IETF mailing list for EPP
Can you please explain your concerns about lack of an official IETF
mailing list?
), many stakeholders are not even aware of EPP proposals going through
standardization, which is somewhat in contradiction to the IETF
transparency goals.
Have a nice weekend!
cheers,
Bernie
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf