Re: [ietf-provreg] Re: EPP over HTTP or simple TCP?

[Klaus Malorny <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>]

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 05:45:43AM +0000,
>  Eugenio Pinto <eugenio.pinto@fccn.pt> wrote
>  a message of 21 lines which said:
> 
>> - A way is to send EPP messages in the body of HTTP requests and
>> manage HTTP requests with standard code.
> 
> That's tempting but it violates RFC 3205 and, besides, there is no
> written specification on EPP-over-HTTP so it will be non-standard.

To my knowledge, there is at least one ccTLD exactly doing this.

> 
>> - Another solution, with less overhead, is to send EPP messages
>> directly in the TCP stream and add some "end-code" characters to the
>> end of the message in order for the server to recognize each EPP
>> message
> 
> Why adding this end-code when RFC 4934 uses a leading length field?
> 
> 4.  Data Unit Format
> 
>    The EPP data unit contains two fields: a 32-bit header that describes
>    the total length of the data unit, and the EPP XML instance.
> 

I fully agree. RFC4934 is quite simple so that there is no real reason why to 
invent other supposed "simple" transport mechanisms, including the use of 
HTTP(S), for new implementations.

Regards,

Klaus

-- 
____________________________________________________________________
      |       |
      | knipp |               Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
       -------                       Technologiepark
                                     Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9
                                     44227 Dortmund

      Geschäftsführer:               Registereintrag:
      Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp     Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728