RE: Requirements for object existence queries

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

I tend to agree with budi, though I contend that the positive response (the
object exists) points to additional information being available.  I believe
it preferable to completely separate the existence query from the "give me
attribute info about the object" query.

Scott Hollenbeck
VeriSign Global Registry Services

-----Original Message-----
From: budi@alliance.globalnetlink.com
[mailto:budi@alliance.globalnetlink.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 8:08 AM
To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: Requirements for object existence queries


Dan Cohen wrote:

> In section 3.9 [4] of the requirements draft,  it says:
> 
> A query to determine if an object exists in the registry MUST return only
a 
> positive or negative response so that server software
> that responds to this query can be optimized for speed.

Pardon my ignorance (just joined a few days ago
and still in ROM mode), but where can I get the
complete draft?


> In think that MUST should change to MAY.  If a registry can implement a 
> highly optimized query that returns more information (maybe the
> registrar who "owns" the object), so much the better.  That information 
> would probably be quite helpful to registrars.

Can't we put this under a postive response?
Perhaps with a code (eg. ala FTP) that says more information
is available. Then, it is up to the client to get this additional
information. Perhaps it just wants to know whether such
object exists or not.

[snip]