[Ietf-not43] From answer to domain

[April Marine]

I have to cry "focus!" here as co-chair.  I think Chris's work is very
interesting, but it is not CRISP.  It is not an implementation of the IRIS
protocol, which is not even fully defined.  Defining that protocol is what
the CRISP WG is tasked to do and what this list needs to focus on.  It's
hard enough to make progress on just ONE topic, so I really don't want to
add more stuff, tangentially relevant as it may be.

I'm sure we can find someone to host list for this effort and I'm sure
many CRISPies would join and comment.  But if we start going off on a
tangent now, we won't finish our "real" work.

This statement in no way is meant as a comment on the work going on here,
just a comment on the fact that is should not be going on "here". :)

Speaking of this WG's work, how about some comments on the discussion
points Andy took the time to put together and post for us?

thanks,
April

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Rick Wesson wrote:

>
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:04:36 -0700
> Chris Ambler <chris.ambler at enom.com> wrote:
>
>
> > WHOIS," but the first step in "WHOIS forward compatibility" for what it's
> > worth (perhaps not much :-))
> >
> > Again, I'm open to consensus on this. Perhaps track dreg as the format, but
> > be a separate effort, which would eliminate any crossover, yet provide for
> > easier interoperability, should that come to pass?
>
> no lets not have seporate efforts, lets get some feedback to the draft authors of what works in the real world. I'll be happy to help chris author a draft on his effort and get that back to this group as some inplementation feedback
>
> -rick
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-not43 mailing list
> Ietf-not43 at lists.verisignlabs.com
> https://lists.verisignlabs.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-not43
>