[registrars] FW: Registrars - gTLD Registries Constituencies - Items for Discussion?

[Mike Lampson]

> So you don't care if a <create> actually creates anything, right?

That's a policy decision.  :-P

I'm not a fan of the PIR/Afilias rules.  They do seem to follow the beat of
a different drummer.  I think they will argue exactly how I described that
there is nothing in the spec that says a <host:chg> operation MUST succeed
if they decide the operation should not be allowed BY POLICY.

PIR's current implementation already ignores the <poll> requirements from
draft 7 of the base specification as I described on the orgissues.net web
site:

  http://www.orgissues.net/orgissues/index.cgi/2003/06/30

I don't expect them to implement <poll> properly under the official 1.0 spec
either.  It will give me the opportunity to revive the orgissues site...

Going back to the original issue, I think it is MOST important that the gTLD
Registries be consistent in their EPP implementations.  The sTLDs should
also be consistent within the confines of their sponsors' business rules.
The ccTLDs (other than those who market themselves as virtual gTLDs) are
probably outside of our influence.  If the Registries don't agree with the
existing specs, fine.  But they better submit the revisions to the IETF and
all MUST implement EPP consistently.  That's the message I'd like to see us
send to the gTLD Constituency.

Just my opinion...

_Mike