To:
Michael Graff <Michael_Graff@isc.org>
Cc:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
Date:
Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:49:05 +0100
Content-Disposition:
inline
In-Reply-To:
<s9s7kf0otbn.fsf@farside.isc.org>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mutt/1.3.28i
Subject:
Re: EPP statuses and other questions
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 10:32:44PM +0000, Michael Graff <Michael_Graff@isc.org> wrote a message of 55 lines which said: > (1) A handle (like FOO1-ISC) is not self-describing. Is that a contact > handle, a domain handle, or what? I see it a a "registry policy" issue. Some will have a global namespace for handles (with the risks you explain) and some will have separate namespaces for contacts and hosts. > (2) Part of the handle namespace is client-chosen, part is registry-chosen. > On contacts, the local (and thus the global) identifiers are chosen > by the registrant, Which is bad, IMHO. It may require several round-trips before the registrar (<pc>the client</pc>) finds a free handle. Why is there no provision for registry-generated contact handles? (Or should we assume the ROID will have this role?)