Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP Operations

[Eugenio Pinto <eugenio.pinto@fccn.pt>]

Hi!

Thanks for your answer. I have some comments inside it.

--eugenio


Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:

> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
>
> apologies, forget my previous mail, your understanding of 
> host-attr/objects
> is correct. I didn't correctly catch your "main question".
>
> If you want internally use host-objects as you described, it's totally
> normal to implicitly create objects for it in your repository.
> IMHO in mostly every database-model used to describe domains with host-
> attributes you need some kind of "host-objects" in your database.
>
> You may get problems when you treat your "db-host-objects" as real
> "host-objects" linking them also to other domains, because to other
> domains the "host-object" with IP is a host WITHOUT IP (e.g. 'foo.pt' 
> with
> ns 'ns.foo.pt' and an IP <=> 'bar.pt' with same ns has no IP, because 
> it's
> not a glue).
> That should be avoided. It could lead to a problem when deleting
> domains. You can create separate "host-objects" in your database when
> used with other domains, or use some (complex) logic to remove the IPs
> from the host when deleting its parent domain.


I think it's not so complex..

--eugenio

>
> To which fields you are mapping the values from an EPP-domain-request
> with hosts (with or without IPs) is up to you. You don't even need
> to store the "sponsoring-client" for a host (it's implicitly defined
> by the relationship to the domain).
>

Yes, we are doing it but for the superordinate domain.

--eugenio

> Kind regards,
>
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
>
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar wrote:
>
>> Dear Eugenio Pinto,
>>
>> your understanding of host-attributes / host-objects is not accurate.
>> ...
>> PS: BTW, also DNSBE (registry for .be) are using host-attributes with 
>> EPP.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jens-Uwe Gaspar
>>
>> Eugenio Pinto wrote:
>>
>>> In Portugal (.pt) we are using host attributes for all domain 
>>> delegations.
>>>
>>> The EPP feature that Scott remembered:
>>>
>>> "With host objects you can change an IP address, for example, 
>>> without having to update (a potentially large number of) domains 
>>> individually."
>>>
>>> turned us to the object concept of hosts.
>>>
>>> Now, with the introduction of EPP, we will have 2 different concepts:
>>>
>>> 1 - Internal hosts : objects with a "sponsoring client" witch is the 
>>> "sponsoring client" of the superordinate domain name of that host
>>>
>>> 2 - External hosts : it's only needed a <domain:hostAttr> element 
>>> with no IP adresses
>>>
>>> We were thinking about creating these external hosts as objects too. 
>>> As they don't have IP addresses it's not necessary to update them. 
>>> And we can just delete them if they are not associated with domain 
>>> names anymore..
>>>
>>> This would be an implicit creation of hosts at the domain creation 
>>> (excluding the <host:create> operation) and could possibly be used 
>>> to the other type of hosts.
>>>
>>> Have you any comments about this implementation?
>>>
>>> --eugenio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I am anyway questioning the usefulness of having host objects in 
>>>>> EPP at all. IMHO the only purpose for a host object is for the 
>>>>> host-to-IP mapping i.e. for the glue records. And glue records are 
>>>>> only needed, if a nameserver is resolving its own superordinate 
>>>>> domainname (neglecting the crossover games and stuff, which anyway 
>>>>> are hard to detect). With host-as-attribute it is rather easy to 
>>>>> require such a missing IP (just reject a domain create/update 
>>>>> request, if name server attribute is subordinate and has no IP). 
>>>>> Therefore I also do not see, why external hosts and internal 
>>>>> hosts, which do not resolve the superordinate domainname, are 
>>>>> treated differently in EPP. Or did I miss something here?
>>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bernie, given that this was discussed extensively on the provreg list
>>>> it's best if you review the provreg archives to get the scoop on the
>>>> rationale.  google can help find specific messages.  One benefit I
>>>> remember involved updates.  With host objects you can change an IP
>>>> address, for example, without having to update (a potentially large
>>>> number of) domains individually.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for letting me know that you're using host attributes.  That's
>>>> just the kind of info that needs to be shared.
>>>>
>>>> -Scott-
>>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Jens-Uwe Gaspar                              Schlund + Partner AG
> E-Mail: jug@schlund.de                       Brauerstr. 48
> Tel. +49-721-91374-50                        76135 Karlsruhe, Germany
> Fax  +49-721-91374-20                        http://www.schlund.de