[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
CC: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From: Klaus Malorny <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 15:42:36 +0200
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: Issues on 3.4.9 Object Information Query

"Hollenbeck, Scott" wrote:
> 
>> [...]
> 
> Good suggestions, but I'm not sure I understand the distinction between the
> suggested new requirements.  What does [0] say that [5] doesn't?  I'm
> inclined to add [5], but I'm not sure I see the need for [0] if we add [5].
> 
> <Scott/>


Hi Scott,

let me explain: we have a domain that references name servers and contacts.
Name servers eventually reference contacts, too. But name servers may also
contain implicit references to the domain they belong to.

e.g.

  domain X.COM    ->  owner A
                  ->  admin B
                  ->  tech  C
                  ->  ns1 NS.Y.DE     ->  tech C
                  ->  ns2 NS.Z.COM    ->  tech D
                                     (->) domain Z.COM



In 3.4.9[1], the registry will surely report the contacts and name servers,
and in 3.4.9[2] the registry will report the contacts, if any.

Subsection [0] was thought to generalize that a bit. In the case of ns2, not
only tech "D" should be reported, but also domain "Z.COM". This may be trivial
for humans, but not necessarily for machines (esp. in a more complex domain
structure, e.g. in the anticipated .name TLD or those with different
registration levels, e.g. .fr).

With "reverse references" I mean the ability to detected the uses of a certain
object. In the given example, the service would report "NS.Y.DE" and "X.COM"
as objects referencing contact "D". Similar to that, a request to domain
"Z.COM" would report "NS.Z.COM". This function is important to detect
"orphaned" objects or to analyse a failed deletion request.

Implicit references are important to be reported if the outcome of operations
depends on it. If the domain "Z.COM" can be removed while keeping the name
server "NS.Z.COM" in the database, I don't have any problems if the reference
is not reported -- but not in the case that it can't be removed. 



The topic overlaps a bit with my other proposal regarding transfers. See my
next e-mail ;-)


regards

Klaus Malorny


___________________________________________________________________________
     |       |
     | knipp |                   Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
      -------                           Technologiepark
                                        Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9
     Dipl. Inf. Klaus Malorny           44227 Dortmund
     Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de             Tel. +49 231 9703 0

Home | Date list | Subject list