Re: [Epp-rtk-devel] RE: ROID Placement

[Daniel Manley <dmanley@tucows.com>]

I'm fine with getting rid of ROIDs from the protocol.

With the re-introduction of the contact id, ROIDs are mostly useless for 
registrars now because it's an extra piece of data that can't be used in 
any EPP requests.  At this point, they only seem to be of benifit to the 
registry (in reports?) and possibly to Whois service.

As for the impact on the RTKs, we would just remove the ROIDs from the 
IDL and removing their parsing from the EPP responses.  Very little impact.

Dan

Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Rick H Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 2:31 PM
>>To: Damaraju, Ayesha
>>Cc: 'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'; epp-rtk-devel
>>Subject: Re: your mail
>>
>>
>>
>>Ayesha,
>>
>>I agree with your analysis but, i woud also like to understand what any
>>other object besides a contact needs a roid. Objects such as hosts and
>>domains are unique within a registry, maybe we should only have a ROID for
>>contacts?
>>
>
>This all goes back to a lengthy requirements discussion about ROIDs and a
>decision that they were required for all objects.  Personally I wouldn't
>complain if we agreed to get rid of them completely ;-), but if a new
>decision is made to associate them only with contacts we'd need to go back
>and change the requirements draft (no big deal), and then it would make
>perfect sense to put the ROID-specific stuff in the contact object mapping.
>
><Scott/>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Epp-rtk-devel mailing list
>Epp-rtk-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/epp-rtk-devel
>