Subject: [ietf-provreg] EPP to Draft: Next Steps

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:03:09 -0400

Now that all of the EPPbis -00 drafts are published, we need to think
about what we do with them.  In addition, moving EPP to Draft Standard
status requires completion of an interoperability report for the
protocol.  Here's my take on needed next steps:

1. I need to make a minor edit to the contact (3733bis) and host
(3732bis) documents to fix one last <poll> use description.  I described
that fix here [1].  I also need to add a sentence to 3730bis (EPP core)
to note that it obsoletes 3730.  The references in 3731bis (domain) will
need to be updated if 3732bis and 3733bis change.  These are the last
needed document changes I'm aware of.

2. There are a couple of ways we can create an interop report.  We can
start with a template that we ask implementers to complete to describe
their client and server implementation and test experiences.  We can
also try to schedule a more-or-less "formal" interop event for people to
test their clients with other participant's servers and vice-versa using
an agreed-upon script.  This would require that participants set up
accessible test rigs, but the end results would be more compelling.

I'd prefer the latter, though I know it's more hands-on work.  What do
other implementers think?

-Scott-

[1]
http://www.cafax.se/ietf-provreg/maillist/2005-09/msg00007.html

---

From: "Michael Young" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:18:51 -0400

I think the second option would be desirable Scott, but just to clarify what
you had in mind,....I assume you mean a testbed that demonstrates compliance
with the core RFC's and not, for example, 3915.

We could hold a meeting at the next IETF meeting to organize how we would do
this with interested participants. 

Michael Young 
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Hollenbeck, Scott
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 9:03 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ietf-provreg] EPP to Draft: Next Steps

Now that all of the EPPbis -00 drafts are published, we need to think about
what we do with them.  In addition, moving EPP to Draft Standard status
requires completion of an interoperability report for the protocol.  Here's
my take on needed next steps:

1. I need to make a minor edit to the contact (3733bis) and host
(3732bis) documents to fix one last <poll> use description.  I described
that fix here [1].  I also need to add a sentence to 3730bis (EPP core) to
note that it obsoletes 3730.  The references in 3731bis (domain) will need
to be updated if 3732bis and 3733bis change.  These are the last needed
document changes I'm aware of.

2. There are a couple of ways we can create an interop report.  We can start
with a template that we ask implementers to complete to describe their
client and server implementation and test experiences.  We can also try to
schedule a more-or-less "formal" interop event for people to test their
clients with other participant's servers and vice-versa using an agreed-upon
script.  This would require that participants set up accessible test rigs,
but the end results would be more compelling.

I'd prefer the latter, though I know it's more hands-on work.  What do other
implementers think?

-Scott-

[1]

---

From: Patrick Mevzek <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 14:50:16 +0200

Hello,

Sorry not to have responded earlier.

Hollenbeck, Scott <[email-masked]> 2005-09-13 19:02
> needed document changes I'm aware of.

I think it would be good if these new versions got a 1.1 value in the
<version> tag during server greeting as opposed to 1.0 for the
current RFCs.

There are minor incompatibilites between the two (among which how to
fill <domain:update> in case of an extension), so it seems worthwile
to me to be able to clearly separates between the two, as some
servers will implement one version, and some will implement the
other.

> other implementers think?

As I said previously [1], I'm willing to participate in any interop
effort by putting on the table an opensource RRP/EPP implementation
(which will, btw, in the next version, add 3 EPP extensions: E164,
SecDNS and Nsgroup).

I'm not sure to be able to travel to remote locations for IETF/ICANN
meetings, so if things can be taken mostly online, this would have my
preference. This would be my first IETF interoperability tests
participation, so count me as a newbie in this activity :-)

Patrick.

[1] http://www.cafax.se/ietf-provreg/maillist/2005-08/msg00039.html

-- 
Patrick Mevzek <[email-masked]>
Dot and Co <http://www.dotandco.com/>