[Ietf-not43] re Focus

[David Blacka]

On Wednesday 15 October 2003 05:24 pm, Rick Wesson wrote:
> 
> April,
> 
> lets not let administrativia get in the way of some valuable work/input.
> 
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
> April Marine <April.Marine at nominum.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hm, in reviewing some of the feedback on my "focus" msg, let me clarify 
a
> > couple of things.
> 
> >  - As I was just looking at the charter and milestones this morning as 
a
> > prelude to making sure they are up to date, the following sentence from
> > the charter is fresh in my mind: "Backwards compatibility with existing
> > administrative directory services such as WHOIS is not a goal of this
> > effort."
> 
> chris's effort is not for backward compatability, the port he is working 
on is irrilivant. he is interested in a single shot query/response lookup 
over SOAP using dreg. He is only using a diferent transport that beep. 
I've herd no implementation report on CRISP over beep, though i have herd 
grumbelings of a desire for a udp transport, so when did SOAP become out 
of scope?

If, fundamentally, Chris is describing a special use case of IRIS, then all 
of his work is in scope.  The use case he is describing 
(registar-to-registrar communication for the purposes of whatever) is one, 
IMHO, that should be in scope for the WG if it isn't.

If, however, he is describing and aiming for a protocol that is somewhere 
between current WHOIS and IRIS, then some of his work will be in scope for 
this group, and some will not.  And unfortunately, it will be difficult to 
tell which is which, because the stuff that is in scope really should be 
discussed on this list because it will help finish IRIS/DREG.

Btw, Rick, what are you looking for as an implementation report of CRISP 
over BEEP?  We've implemented it and released the code.  We've even 
released a perl command line client that uses BEEP.

-- 
David Blacka    <davidb at verisignlabs.com> 
Sr. Engineer    Verisign Applied Research