Re: Merging RRP and Whois

[George Belotsky <george@register.com>]

Good idea.  Because the RRP group seems to be further along, 'here'
applies more to the RRP.  It is partially applicable to the Whois as
well.

Lots of issues have been raised on the two lists, including privacy
and authentication.  Of course, the policy is likely to be quite
complex, and determined by laws, customs, etc. in various parts of the
world.  We must create a mechanism that can support the large variety
of policies that are likely to emerge sooner or later.  Because of the
complexities involved, it would be best to create a single, evolving
mechanism.  

In order to do so, it is very helpful to view the registration system
as a number of object repositories (which may contain things other
than domain names), with each repository being managed by a registry.
The object repositories should all support a single interface, which
allows for a variety of users.  These include superusers (i.e. the
registry performing maintenance) and privileged users (i.e. the
registrars registering, modifying, deleting and transferring objects)
as well as users with only moderate privileges (e.g. paid subscribers
to an advanced Whois service) and minimally privileged users
(i.e. users of the public Whois).

If we start separating users into different privilege categories by
writing a different protocol for each category, how many protocols will
we end up with?  Clearly, a single protocol is the most logical
solution.

George.

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 05:18:53PM +0100, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> At 11.11 -0500 01-01-24, George Belotsky wrote:
> >It very important to keep in mind that a _protocol_ is being created
> >here.
> 
> As this thread is cross-posted between two mailing lists, you should 
> be more specific than saying "here".
> 
>     paf
> 

-- 
-----------------------------
George Belotsky
Senior Software Architect
Register.com, inc.
george@register.com
212-798-9127 (phone)
212-798-9876 (fax)