Re: [EPP-discuss] EPP status presentation from registrar meeting in Århus/Denmark 2011-05-04

From: Jonas B. Nielsen <jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 13:39:13 +0200

Hello Boris,

Well I would like to do iterative releases along a the following lines:

1. Preliminary specification
2. Specification

3. Feature implementation
4. Feature release to test environment

Repeating 3 and 4 until specification has been met.

5. Release to production
6. Cloning of production setup to Sandbox and Test environments

8... Futher life-cyle with new releases (bug fixes, features etc.) being deployed to Test prior to being released to Production and Sandbox. This will reflect a cycle along the lines of all of the above points in shorter cycles.

The test environment will always reflect upcoming releases, changes to specifications will be sent out to document these accordingly. I expect most of these features to be discussed on this list, since the initial requests will most likely be coming from registrars.

The sandbox environment will be a non-destructive or at least very forgiving environment mimicking production. Designated to allowed clients to develop against without having to feel like chasing a moving target (test).

jonasbn

On 06/05/2011, at 11.48, Boris Fernandez wrote:

> Jonas,
>
>> I am aiming for an iterative release process, so we might have a more realistic and pragmatic approach to getting the specification and software out to you
>
> Do you have an idea if this will be done before you go live ? I am following you on that one and you got the right thoughts.
>
> But have you already decided if you will give us access to a testing environement, and soon enough for us to test everyting before the release ?
>
> To be honest I hope I won't have again to implement something like .NU... half EPP, Half email callbacks or phone calls =) instead of giving us a environement to test prior launch they decided to go live directly with it, and now we have to wait for them to implement the rest of it....
>
> And to bounce on Tobias about Nomitet, If you are lucky (or mad) enough you have implemented the Nominet EPP... otherwise you are on their standard EPP with half of the option you could use on their EPP and you still have stuff to do online :)
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Boris A. Fernandez
> Application Support Team Leader
> Direct:
> +45 33 88 63 41
> Mobile:
> +45 27 53 63 41
> Office:
> +45 33 88 61 00
> Fax:
> +45 33 88 61 01
> www.ascio.com
>
> Islands Brygge 55, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark
> A Group NBT company
> ............................................................................................................................
> The information in this internet email is confidential and
> may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.
> Access to this internet email by anyone else is unauthorized.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance
> on it is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> ............................................................................................................................
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonas B. Nielsen [mailto:jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk]
> Sent: 6. maj 2011 11:32
> To: EPP-discuss_at_liste.dk-hostmaster.dk
> Subject: Re: [EPP-discuss] EPP status presentation from registrar meeting in Århus/Denmark 2011-05-04
>
> Hello Benny,
>
> I think you must have misunderstood something.
>
> As I recall Per said that DK Hostmaster regards EPP as a channel to our systems/backend. This is something I support, since it is how it fits into my architectural perspective of how software systems generally should work.
>
> We might have mentioned that we have a working EPP solution, which was created years ago, but it was never deployed. It might have been me who mentioned this at the meeting since I was involved in the actual implementation. In retrospect I am glad it never was deployed.
>
> 1. It only implement a very limited set of the EPP commands
> 2. It relies heavily on extensions
> 3. It would be hard to move a way from it once it was deployed
>
> Back then It was my hope to get that existing solution deployed to get some traction, this might have been defined by me to be about Q1/2011. I am going to be more careful with dates in the future. Please also see my response to Boris in this thread. I am aiming for an iterative release process, so we might have a more realistic and pragmatic approach to getting the specification and software out to you.
>
>
> jonasbn
> --
> Jonas Brømsø Nielsen
>
> Software Developer at DK Hostmaster A/S
> http://www.dk-hostmaster.dk
> +45 31546056
>
> On 06/05/2011, at 11.17, Benny - ISPHuset Nordic AS wrote:
>
>> Thats rather funny because I am sure that on the Copenhagen meeting it was pointed out by Per Kølle that the EPP was already running in the backend and only minor things where to be done... Are you now saying that this was not true at the moment it was told to the registrars attending the meeting?
>>
>> /Benny
>> ISPHuset
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jonas B. Nielsen [mailto:jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk]
>> Sent: 6. mai 2011 11:12
>> To: EPP-discuss_at_liste.dk-hostmaster.dk
>> Subject: Re: [EPP-discuss] EPP status presentation from registrar meeting in Århus/Denmark 2011-05-04
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> There is no current EPP implementation and the presentation from the Århus meeting was aimed at trying to give a response to some of the attending registrars had raised at earlier occasions. This should give a basic outline of some of the requirements under which the EPP solution is going to be working.
>>
>> I hope it will not be necessary to implement special extensions, but I do not have a complete overview of the extent at this time, well at not in a publishable format anyway.
>>
>> jonasbn
>> --
>> Jonas Brømsø Nielsen
>>
>> Software Developer at DK Hostmaster A/S
>> http://www.dk-hostmaster.dk
>> +45 31546056
>>
>> On 06/05/2011, at 10.33, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>>
>>> What is needed is from DK-Hostmaster a detailed description of the EPP status of .DK, what features in .EPP is in use, and the evaluation I take for granted DK-Hostmaster have done regarding deciding on extensions that are special for .DK, and what extensions have been inherited from other TLDs. And if private .DK special extensions have been chosen, an explanation on why.
>>>
>>> Any special extension a registry chooses imply great cost for the registrars, and unfortunately, as a registrar, I see TLDs unfortunately take too lightly how complicated it is to manage private extensions.
>>>
>>> So, I have great hope DK-Hostmaster have chosen to not create any private extensions at all, and in worst case have inherited same extensions as some other TLDs.
>>>
>>> Patrik
>>>
>>> On 6 maj 2011, at 10.29, Benny - ISPHuset Nordic AS wrote:
>>>
>>>> Seriøst ?
>>>>
>>>> Den fortæller jo ingenting...
>>>>
>>>> /Benny
>>>> ISPHuset
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jonas B. Nielsen [mailto:jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk]
>>>> Sent: 6. mai 2011 9:59
>>>> To: epp-discuss_at_liste.dk-hostmaster.dk
>>>> Subject: [EPP-discuss] EPP status presentation from registrar meeting in Århus/Denmark 2011-05-04
>>>>
>>>> By request I hereby forward the presentation from the recently held registrar meeting in Århus/Denmark.
>>>>
>>>> The slides are in Danish, but it should not be anything Google translate cannot handle.
>>>>
>>>> jonasbn
>>>> --
>>>> Jonas Brømsø Nielsen
>>>>
>>>> Software Developer at DK Hostmaster A/S
>>>> http://www.dk-hostmaster.dk
>>>> +45 31546056
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Fri May 06 2011 - 13:39:13 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 06 2015 - 11:39:02 CET