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


To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
cc: "'Klaus Malorny'" <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>, "'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From: Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 09:49:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <DF737E620579D411A8E400D0B77E671D01878074@regdom-ex01.prod.netsol.com>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: RE: Poll response data


Scott,

On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:


> After thinking about this for a bit, I like Klaus' idea of returning more
> transfer detail in the <poll> response.  Doing so will help reduce the need
> to do an immediate <transfer> query right after receiving a message to
> obtain the details of a pending transfer.
>

however the tradeoff is that the queue(s) wiill have to be larger and
couldn't the information become out of sync with the rest of the registry?

  Registrar-A submits a transfer request for foo.com from Registrar-B
  <registry inserts stuff in queue>
  Registrar-B does poll and ACK on foo.com
  Registrar-A does a poll -> is the information correct?

A better question is this situation ok?

-rick



Home | Date list | Subject list