I actually read this draft and I have concerns.For me the draft is super complex and pretty hard to follow. It seems to me to include quite a bit of business rules description, which almost read like policy. I would prefer this draft to focus more on the statuses, requests and responses (the things happening on the wire) instead of that much focus on what kind of complex rules to apply for these statuses to appear. In the current shape I think there might be difficulty to get energy in the working group to work on it.
On the protocol itself I don't like the logic of overloading update operation for creating (named allocating) and deleting (deallocating?), instead of using standard semantics of create and delete commands. I think this would disrupt the way registries implement lifecycle of the names, lead to confusions and have unforeseen consequences downstream. There is a technical issue about it, that the related names actually can have distinct dataset compared to their primary name. Update (allocate) is having differential semantic compared to create having a declarative semantics. Update of something that was never created would have a missing point of reference for the differential semantic.
I am also a bit nervous about all the responses which define potentially large lists or related domains without any way for the client to opt out (or opt in) from them. The information may be useful to a client but likely not in every response so some control on this would be useful.
Kind Regards, Pawel On 04.11.25 14:55, [email protected] wrote:
Internet-Draft draft-galvin-regext-epp-variants-04.txt is now available. It is
a work item of the Registration Protocols Extensions (REGEXT) WG of the IETF.
Title: Domain Related Group Support for EPP
Authors: James Galvin
Michael Bauland
Name: draft-galvin-regext-epp-variants-04.txt
Pages: 19
Dates: 2025-11-04
Abstract:
This document defines an EPP extension allowing clients to learn
about and manipulate related groups of domains, ie. groups of domains
whose names are equivalent in a registry-defined way and are tied to
a single registrant.
The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-galvin-regext-epp-variants/
There is also an HTML version available at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-galvin-regext-epp-variants-04.html
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-galvin-regext-epp-variants-04
Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
