RE: "External" hosts in EPP

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Scott,

In effect, if everyone approves, we are stating that a registry really
provides mamanement services for the nameserves in the zones the registry
is responsible for.

sure, we loose some management capability for the SLDs that use name
servers not in the same zone but it mkae the management of all host
objects much easier and clarifys many obtuse rules that effect name server
management under other proposals.

-rick



 On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick H Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 2:17 PM
> > To: asbjorn.rrp@theglobalname.org
> > Cc: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
> > Subject: Re: "External" hosts in EPP
> >
> >
> >
> > asbjorn,
> >
> > another potential solution is to only requre host objects for hosts that
> > require glue. in other words hosts outside the zone don't need a host
> > object created. hosts inside the managed zone require a host object to be
> > created and associated with the deligation.
>
> True, but this gets us back to the issue of losing the ability to change one
> host object and having the change(s) reflected to all domains delegated to
> the host.  Do folks think that the benefit of the suggested change is
> greater than the downside of having to perform host changes on a
> domain-by-domain basis?
>
> I'm not trying to slam the suggestion (it could work quite well), I just
> want to see a measure of interest in the trade-off.
>
> -Scott-
>