Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP over UDP for Domain Availability Checking?

[Ed Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>]

First, one has to presume that this is external to the PROVREG WG
effort.  (The charter would forbid it on a number of grounds.) 
Nevertheless, this ought to be considered - and recall that this list
will outlive the WG.  (It's not a matter of scope for the list.)

Congestion control was one of the issues that we (PROVREG WG) got hit
with (in the IESG comments).  But with this being UDP, I don't think
that congestion is a concern.  (UDP is UDP, no retransmission.  Unless
something else is screwed up in design - no amplification of traffic
load.)

Who gets to be the client?  I would assume there are a lot more who
would want this data than just the registrars.

How does this fit next to what the CRISP WG is chartered to do?  The
difference between transports (UDP vs. connection oriented) is
significant.

On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 12:38, Jens Wagner wrote:
> Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> 
> >I just spent a few minutes writing client and server software in perl to
> >send and receive EPP <check> commands and responses.  It's very doable.
> >Does anyone think that they might find it useful to have a documented way to
> >use EPP over UDP for domain availability checking?
> >
> >I'm thinking that registries might find it useful to provide a UDP service
> >for high-volume, no-session-required domain checking.  People that want only
> >availability information might find a UDP-based client more useful than
> >whois.
> >
> >-Scott-
> >  
> >
> Sure, but this does also simplify DoS attacks against registries that 
> have to perform availability checks using their SQL backend. But it 
> cannot hurt to have such a spec handy, even if for internal purposes 
> only :-)
> 
> Best regards,
> -jens