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


To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
cc: "'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>, brunner@nic-naa.net
From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:17:28 -0400
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 21 Sep 2001 07:55:58 EDT." <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD6C5FA7B@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: <check> Response Attribute

Scott,

You propose to restrict the type of <check> from an enumerated extensible
set (token) to a enumerated inextensible (boolean) set.

How do you propose we handle requirements for "reserved" domain names?

Eric

> The <check> command response currently returns an element attribute to note
> if an object exists.  The value space of this attribute is really boolean,
> but the current schema uses a "+" to note "exists" and a "-" to note
> "doesn't exist".  I'd like to propose a simplification for the sake of
> consistency with other boolean attributes, changing the type of the
> attribute to "boolean", an XML Schema data type.  This would mean that the
> acceptable values become "1" and "true" for "exists" , and "0" and "false"
> for "doesn't exist".

Home | Date list | Subject list