RE: <check> Response Attribute

[Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com>]

Wow, another contentious debate over a fairly small feature.  Imagine that,
in the IETF!  (Yes, a bit of sarcasm, folks.)

After reading the thread and other considerations, it seems that there is
consensus that, and good technical reason to state that:

1) The result of a <check> is a boolean value.
2) A <check> should also be able to return a reason why (if applicable) a
name is unavailable.

The rational behind #1 is that either a name is or is not available.
Although future extentions are always a consideration, extending the
<check> command is of questionable value.

The reasoning behind #2 is that policy varies from registry to registry,
and EPP is to be policy neutral.  IMHO, it is too early to try to make an
all inclusive enumeration of all reasons for "no" so we shouldn't waste
time trying to do so now.  Note - the means of return a "why" need to be
defined in an internationalized manner.  This is something I didn't see
explicitly suggested in any message.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                NAI Labs
Phone: +1 443-259-2352                      Email: lewis@tislabs.com

You fly too often when ... the airport taxi is on speed-dial.

Opinions expressed are property of my evil twin, not my employer.