Subject: [Ietf-not43] Standard vocabulary (Was: new IRIS drafts

From: [email-masked] (Stephane Bortzmeyer)
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 15:08:33 +0200

On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 10:51:57AM -0400,
 Andrew Newton <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 71 lines which said:

> While the concepts have not changed, much of the terminology in the core
> draft has changed to be clearer. 

Speaking of terminology, I regret that there is (apparently) no effort
to use the same vocabulary in the two IETF WG that deal with the
registry interface (Provreg and Crisp). For instance,
draft-ietf-crisp-iris-dreg-00 and draft-ietf-provreg-epp-domain-05 do
not use the same words for the status of a domain (for instance, EPP
uses "ok" where IRIS uses "assignedAndActive").

What about a common text describing the glossary?

---

From: [email-masked] (Andrew Newton)
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 20:07:40 -0700

This is a MIME-formatted message.  If you see this text it means that your
E-mail software does not support MIME-formatted messages.

--=_zark-2197-1031015381-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> uses "ok" where IRIS uses "assignedAndActive").

Actually, that wasn't the terminology I was referring to.

You'll find that I used the same codes that Eric used in the LW drafts. 
  They seemed to be a superset of what EPP was doing.  IRIS should be 
capable of expressing all the data that EPP can register with a couple 
of exceptions that don't make sense for the CRISP problem.

Eric can best speak for LW, but I believe the same is true with it.

> What about a common text describing the glossary? 

For general terms, such a critter exists in requirements-00.

-andy

--=_zark-2197-1031015381-0001-2
Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

--=_zark-2197-1031015381-0001-2--