[regext] Re: [Ext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9083 (7985)

[kowalik]

If Figure 28 is not intended to be a full example, then it should likely use the "..." notation to indicate that better. This notation is used for example in Figure 21 or Figure 25 however it is not consistently used in all examples.

Kind regards,

Pawel

On 14.06.24 15:15, Gavin Brown wrote:

Hi Scott,

On 14 Jun 2024, at 13:38, Hollenbeck, Scott<shollenb...@verisign.com>  wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Brown<gavin.br...@icann.org>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2024 8:32 AM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott<shollenb...@verisign.com>
Cc:rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org;a...@hxr.us;superu...@gmail.com;
orie@transmute.industries;gal...@elistx.com;i...@antoin.nl;regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ext] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9083 (7985)

Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links
or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.

Hi Scott,

On 12 Jun 2024, at 17:42, Hollenbeck, Scott<shollenb...@verisign.com>

wrote:

I'm inclined to reject this report. The example cited in Figure 28 is described

in the text as a "common response body", not a complete RDAP response. The
error response body is described in the context of a complete RDAP response
in Figure 29, which includes an rdapConformance data structure. As such, the
examples in the two figures are fine as-is.

I'm puzzled by this. What is actually meant by "common response body", and
in what way does the stipulation in Section 4.1 not apply to it?

[SAH] It was intended to describe a set of elements, not a complete response, 
that would be commonly returned to identify an error condition. A complete 
response that includes those elements, and an rdapConformance element, is 
described in the very next figure.

Thanks, this is helpful to understand the intent of the text. My impression now 
is that Figure 28 isn't intended to be an example of a complete error response, 
rather it is intended to illustrate the additional properties that could be 
overlaid on top of a standard RDAP response (which would include 
rdapConformance, notices, etc). Is that correct?


--
Gavin Brown
Principal Engineer, Global Domains & Strategy
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

https://www.icann.org

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list --regext@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email toregext-le...@ietf.org

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org