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-