Re: Standard mappings hardwired in EPP servers? (Was: lastVerified: o ptional vs. extension

[Hong Liu <lhongsms@yahoo.com>]

Agree. I bet this is what the standard mappings are
for.

--- Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 10:59:11AM -0500,
>  Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org> wrote 
>  a message of 25 lines which said:
> 
> > It is also important to remember that the domain
> and nameserver mapping 
> > documents are extensions to the base protocol, and
> not integral to it. 
> > There is nothing to stop a registry for whom the
> current documents are 
> > not a good match from writing their own mapping
> documents that better 
> > suit their purposes.
> 
> Yes, but this could be a nightmare for the
> implementor of the EPP
> server: if you distribute a shrink-wrapped server
> (wether free
> software or closed), you need some sort of plug-in
> mechanism in the
> server in order to support "alternative" mappings.
> It is not obvious
> to realize. (/etc/epp.conf contains a relationship
> of
> extension->module/class to load? And the registry
> develops the local
> modules/classes?)
> 
> Let's try: how many EPP servers (whatever their
> legal status) have the
> "standard" mappings hardwired in the code? I assume
> "all".
> 
> It is also a problem for the registrars: if you
> interact with several
> registries and they use different EPP mappings, you
> lose a part of the
> reason to have a standard protocol...


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com