Hi Gavin,

From: Andy Newton <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, January 8, 2026 at 9:22 AM
To: Jorge Cano <[email protected]>, 
[email protected] 
<[email protected]>, [email protected] 
<[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [regext] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-regext-rdap-ttl-extension-03 
(Ends 2026-01-19)

On the 3rd paragraph in Section 1:

> This document is complementary to the Extensible Provisioning Protocol 
> [RFC5730] (EPP)
> Mapping for DNS Time-to-Live (TTL) Values [RFC9803], but registry operators 
> do not
> need to implement that extension in their EPP server in order to implement 
> this RDAP extension.

It may be worth noting that the data model intentionally does not support a per 
record TTL.

[JS] Andy and I were discussing this. Since RFC 2181 deprecated differing TTLs 
in an RRSet, it might help to clarify this data model decision by referring to 
section 5.2 of that RFC [1].

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2181#autoid-9


Jasdip

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to