To:
"Alexander Mayrhofer" <axelm@nic.at>, <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date:
Thu, 29 Sep 2005 10:56:01 -0400
Content-class:
urn:content-classes:message
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Thread-Index:
AcXFBFyJCYh7uDcbQiC9dYi6MPJoqAAAGoZA
Thread-Topic:
[ietf-provreg] RFC updates - roid length restriction
Subject:
RE: [ietf-provreg] RFC updates - roid length restriction
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se > [mailto:owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se] On Behalf Of Alexander Mayrhofer > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 10:28 AM > To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se > Subject: [ietf-provreg] RFC updates - roid length restriction > > > We are currently evaluating EPP to replace our email based > provisioning > system in our ccTLD registry (.at) > > One of the (surprisingly few remaining) issues we encountered is that > handles for our contact objects extend beyond the > 16-character limit of EPP > repository object id's (we have handles like > "AMFR12011011-NICAT". We don't > want to change or even drop the suffix on our object > identifiers (because > all of our registrars would have to do the same in their > internal databases) > so our only option now seems to go for either an extension of > some kind, or > to completely replace contact & domain mapping with our local > mappings. > > The different roid length would then be the only essential difference > between stock and local mappings, so we'd like to avoid that. > > Questions: > > - Did any other registry operators already encounter this, or > are we the > only ones who use "oversized" handles (i can't believe that)? > - Should therefore the length restriction be extended (to eg. > 32 characters) > in the "refurbished" drafts to safely avoid such problems? > > any comments appreciated. Alex, the local part of a repository object ID (ROID) can be up to 80 characters in length. The IANA-registered repository identifier part of the ROID is limited to 8 characters. Here's the regex pattern from the schema: <pattern value="(\w|_){1,80}-\w{1,8}"/> If you're instead talking about the <contact:id> element (the one with a minimum length of 3 characters and a maximum length of 16 characters), that's intended to be a slightly more human-friendly string. It shouldn't necessarily map to whatever local handles you're using given that the ROID can be used for that purpose. Are you not using the ROID? -Scott-