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


To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From: Patrick <patrick@gandi.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 14:42:02 +0100
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <s9s7kf0otbn.fsf@farside.isc.org>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i
Subject: Re: EPP statuses and other questions

On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 10:32:44PM +0000, Michael Graff took time to write:
> Michael Graff <Michael_Graff@isc.org> writes:
> 
> > I've read almost every post on that page, and a few from other pages.
> 
> And after reading much more, I feel the mistake is that there are two
> handles for objects now, and that is becomming a pain in trying to
> implement EPP.

As someone implementing EPP, I totally agree with Michael.

> (3)  The various <create> commands need to return the ROID an object was
>      assigned.  As things are now, I need to look up the contact using
>      <info> before I can use it in an <authinfo roid="whatever"> tag.

This is a serious problem. IIRC it was given in the create response
in earlier drafts, then removed.

Current status of ROIDs in the three new gTLD registries is a mess,
especially regarding what is available in whois.

If the purpose is to confuse registrants, currently it is achieved.
Most people have problems with handles, and currently they must have,
for them a different handle for *each* Registry.

> (6)  EPP is extensible.  Once other issues, such as how to notify
>      referrers of data, or even a good use for this sort of thing is
>      found, a draft can be written to extend EPP to handle
>      registry-side ROIDs.  Until then, I at least feel they complicate
>      an already complicated protocol, and should be removed for now.

Agreed.

Patrick.

Home | Date list | Subject list