Joe, Thanks. I think it may have been the tangents that confused me... and perhaps your reaction to my poorly stated comment about Whois, which was intended to convey my impression that most of the end users (not law enforcement or other specialists, including those who are interested in figuring out what names might be available for sale) who think to look up a domain name at all think in terms or either whois or some web page that probably has "whois" in its name (again, regardless of what is in its back end). None of those issues is, at least IMO, a bar to advancing the document but they, and their relatives, probably justify the small amount of additional explanation that is now in the text. best, john --On Monday, February 22, 2021 18:52 -0500 Joe Abley <jabley@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Feb 22, 2021, at 18:45, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> I guess the bottom line question is whether the new text >> describing the justification for the advancement works for >> both of you or if more tweaking is in order. > > My note was simply intended to clarify that RDAP is quite > extensively deployed in domain registries (and provide colour > as to why), since your note suggested that you thought > otherwise. > > Quite possibly I misread, and no doubt my reply contained > tangents. > > I remain happy with advancement with or without the extra text. > > > Joe -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
