From: Jaap Akkerhuis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:12:46 +0100
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Registry Escrow Information as EPP Spec?
[Was stuck in a spam trap, resending --jaap] From: Andrew Newton <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Registry Escrow Information as EPP Spec? Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:33:55 -0500 To: Andrew Sullivan <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Feb 21, 2006, at 11:40 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Aside from the XML problems with the escrow spec, I have the > reservation that the escrow requirements (or at least, the ones I've > had to comply with) wouldn't actually allow one to rebuild the > registry if one were reduced to using it. My own view is that it is > inadequate, therefore. Escrow requirements would seem to be a superset of which the database serialization is one component. > It seems to me that you _could_ represent most of the > content of an EPP-provisioned registry simply by outputting all of > the EPP commands necessary to generate the content of the registry. Another approach is to use Section 5 of RFC 3981. Of course, it would be much better with DREG2, which Fred and I are trying to get out the door. -andy