Re: Expiration times [was Re: domreg BOF Meeting Minutes]

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

> > [1] The protocol MUST provide services to register Internet domain
> > names, and SHOULD allow for the registration of other unique
> > alphanumeric identifiers.
>
> So you're recommending instituting a "class of service" identifier,
> where the default (perhaps) is mandated? You realize that you're
> introducing the need for an "IANA function" to register the classes,
> as I see it?

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. At the very least it ensures that the
classes aren't inadvertently overlapping, thereby guaranteeing at least a
modicum of consistency. The question is, does this attribute have any real
value?
>
> > * I've made the expiration date optional, to cater for the case
> >   where objects are registered indefinitely (rare for domain names,
> >   common in some other identifier spaces).
>
> I would suggest making it non-optional, but allowing that a specific
> "forever" value be acceptable (subject to rejection by the registry,
> based on local policies, as you've indicated). To be complete, I
> don't like the thought of the default no-info meaning "forever."

Agreed, too much grey...I'm not sure what the current fashion is, but I
certainly prefer explicit statements where possible...

-rwr