Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[Antoin Verschuren]

This call for adoption closed last week.
We have 8 people that support and no rejections, so the chairs consider this 
document adopted.

With this message the chairs ask the authors to submit version 00 of a working 
group document, that is the same as the current document, using the following 
pre-approved draft name:

draft-ietf-regext--epp-delete-bcp

Andrew Newton has volunteered to be the document shepherd.

Work can begin as soon as the 00 is published.

With regards to the milestones, the next available slot is September 2024. If 
this is not a plausible milestone, please let the chairs know.


Thanks,

Your co-chairs Jim and Antoin




> Op 29 jan. 2024, om 16:17 heeft Antoin Verschuren 
>  het volgende geschreven:
> 
> This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain 
> and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):
> 
>   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp/
> 
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
> REGEXT and comment to this message on the list, clearly stating your view.
> Andy Newton already volunteered to be a document shepherd this item will be 
> adopted.
> 
> This Call For Adoption will close on Monday 12 February.
> 
> If there are no objections, the chairs will consider this document adopted.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Your REGEXT co-chairs Jim and Antoin
> 
> ___
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[Gould, James]

Pawel,



On the question of whether 5.2.2.4 "Inform Affected Clients" and 5.2.2.5 "Allow 
Explicit Delete of Domain with Restore Capability" and the need for new EPP 
extensions to support them, below are my thoughts.  The difference between the 
two options is the object that is deleted (host in 5.2.2.4 and domain name in 
5.2.2.5).  These options could be combined by allowing the delete of the domain 
name with RGP support, but to include notification via Change Poll messages for 
the impacted domain names.  This cascade update and potential insert of a very 
large set of Change Poll messages would be something new in EPP and represents 
a scalability issue (e.g., delete of example.com with 20 child hosts and with 
10,000 linked domain names).   I believe the existing set of EPP RFCs can be 
leveraged, but the question is how they are leveraged.



  1.  5.2.2.4 "Inform Affected Clients" – The use of the Change Poll Extension 
in RFC 8590 could certainly be reused for this purpose.  This brings up the 
question of whether the domain names are being changed in an EPP sense and the 
concern of the number of change poll messages that could be generated.
 *   For the question, the change to the domain names is a side-effect of 
the allowing for the deletion of the host, so should the domain name updated 
date and updated identifier be changed as part of the side effect?  There was 
no domain name command executed, so an argument could be made that the domain 
name itself was not modified and the updated date and updated identifier should 
not be touched.  If no domain name change is made, what would the Change Poll 
message look like, where the updated date and the change poll date would not 
match?  If we considered the cascading de-linkage of the host from a domain 
name as an implicit update to the domain name that does change the updated date 
and updated identifier, then the Change Poll message would certainly apply.
 *   Dealing with the number of links from the host to the domain names is 
a scalability issue that would need to be addressed for both 5.2.2.4 “Inform 
Affected Clients” and 5.2.2.5 “Allow Explicit Delete of Domain with Restore 
Capability”, where the de-linkage and the generation of poll messages would 
need to be handled asynchronously.  In this case, the host delete may need to 
result in the use of the pendingDelete status until all the links are removed 
and the poll messages are inserted.
  2.  5.2.2.5 “Allow Explicit Delete of Domain with Restore Capability” – The 
delete of a domain name with child hosts that are delegating name servers and 
with restore capability is supported by the RFCs (RFC 5731 and 3915)., but the 
disablement, re-enablement, and eventual purging of the links would need to be 
handled asynchronously.  5.2.2.4 “Inform Affected Clients” brings up the 
question of whether the disablement and re-enablement actions are implicit 
updates to the linked domain names and the need for notification via the Change 
Poll message.



--



JG







James Gould

Fellow Engineer

jgo...@verisign.com 




703-948-3271

12061 Bluemont Way

Reston, VA 20190



Verisign.com 









On 2/1/24, 2:44 AM, "regext on behalf of kowa...@denic.de 
" mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of kowa...@denic.de 
> wrote:





Hi,





I support the adoption.





I think this is the right group to work on this issue, however a close

sync and thorough review by dnsop shall be assured.





One comment/question to the document: my understanding is that it

presents a mix of existing and not yet existing or proposed new

practices for handling of the issue. Chapter 5 is not specific in the

respect which methods are existing and which are proposed. Only chapter

6 makes it more clear, at least for those methods proposed as best practice.





Also, are methods 5.2.2.4. and 5.2.2.5. already covered in the existing

EPP specifications, or new extensions are required to cover them?





Kind Regards,





Pawel





On 29.01.24 16:17, Antoin Verschuren wrote:

> This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain 
> and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):

>

> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1GHwQtj-dgofSM9mjdF-3jkPplcAI-VMFJNy1P1gjTGTjHuD_IE3RjI1IEuvsaZAHe4gLwV4Qld75mUIrSQj8KbOGhdpA_nkAyPv6xFyhTos0l8ssVtHQvL7IiGpOqdsSuDsJOXRYFFi6T_BQB8tG2_D6Ud0BjJJiVpnp7KRzOSDvvSng6stDMeIWuxVyPYiM6RVOFVyeE45-h5_Ehzb8Jy-cSnU1UCeqKXgOp6IuQqc0-SvN8RnIGk255FRMsErP4XABmmzmduuv21cVKqkrUShHo_0OD5GDHU3cIO5RSjk/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp%2F
>  
> 

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[kowalik]

Hi,

I support the adoption.

I think this is the right group to work on this issue, however a close 
sync and thorough review by dnsop shall be assured.


One comment/question to the document: my understanding is that it 
presents a mix of existing and not yet existing or proposed new 
practices for handling of the issue. Chapter 5 is not specific in the 
respect which methods are existing and which are proposed. Only chapter 
6 makes it more clear, at least for those methods proposed as best practice.


Also, are methods 5.2.2.4. and 5.2.2.5. already covered in the existing 
EPP specifications, or new extensions are required to cover them?


Kind Regards,

Pawel

On 29.01.24 16:17, Antoin Verschuren wrote:

This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain 
and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp/

Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
REGEXT and comment to this message on the list, clearly stating your view.
Andy Newton already volunteered to be a document shepherd this item will be 
adopted.

This Call For Adoption will close on Monday 12 February.

If there are no objections, the chairs will consider this document adopted.

Thanks,

Your REGEXT co-chairs Jim and Antoin

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[Andrew Newton]

+1. And restating my previous email... I'm willing to shepard.

-andy

On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:19 AM Antoin Verschuren
 wrote:
>
> This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain 
> and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):
>
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp/
>
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
> REGEXT and comment to this message on the list, clearly stating your view.
> Andy Newton already volunteered to be a document shepherd this item will be 
> adopted.
>
> This Call For Adoption will close on Monday 12 February.
>
> If there are no objections, the chairs will consider this document adopted.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Your REGEXT co-chairs Jim and Antoin
>
> ___
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[Tobias Sattler]

+1

> On Jan 29, 2024, at 16:17, Antoin Verschuren 
>  wrote:
> 
> This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain 
> and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):
> 
>   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp/
> 
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
> REGEXT and comment to this message on the list, clearly stating your view.
> Andy Newton already volunteered to be a document shepherd this item will be 
> adopted.
> 
> This Call For Adoption will close on Monday 12 February.
> 
> If there are no objections, the chairs will consider this document adopted.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Your REGEXT co-chairs Jim and Antoin
> 
> ___
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[Mario Loffredo]

I support adoption.

Mario

Il 29/01/2024 16:17, Antoin Verschuren ha scritto:

This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain 
and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp/

Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
REGEXT and comment to this message on the list, clearly stating your view.
Andy Newton already volunteered to be a document shepherd this item will be 
adopted.

This Call For Adoption will close on Monday 12 February.

If there are no objections, the chairs will consider this document adopted.

Thanks,

Your REGEXT co-chairs Jim and Antoin

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext


--
Dott. Mario Loffredo
Senior Technologist
Technological Unit “Digital Innovation”
Institute of Informatics and Telematics (IIT)
National Research Council (CNR)
via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy
Phone: +39.0503153497
Web: http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp

[Hollenbeck, Scott]

+1. As I said in my original request:

"The authors believe it's in good shape given the feedback received to date and 
it may be close to ready for working group last call if the working group 
agrees with our descriptions of the documented practices and recommendations 
for those that we consider "best"."

Scott

> -Original Message-
> From: regext  On Behalf Of Antoin Verschuren
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2024 10:18 AM
> To: regext 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-hollenbeck-regext-
> epp-delete-bcp
>
> 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.
>
> This is the formal adoption request for Best Practices for Deletion of Domain
> and Host Objects in the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP):
>
>   https://secure-
> web.cisco.com/1_UAAjuyS968d0PfUDQplLlEbM2HrAeqyPFDacDcY1TVg86ZG
> jtuwGTxBIat8ByrDzv6iZipevaCJC-r1Dz7ow8zLxHYzKkpGmfM-
> vBO175j_vPXjd06ew4aEL55EE9UbfD41AeAR7roUMcRSvcI29t3hSrUYCDcs0V
> vbH6FEQ8JmG142LFXxHDOoDF8kwEef76oNOHiF4ksfCneeC6V2tznbeLnlcWf
> YfEusus15SeR8qP3NkXmLPI5sbrTahc73Yz6fkkeIuPQpceEk_I1h91nK2mUYA8
> 3vfHMHWtpY4l-
> iyuYoaGEHoKhc6feFHEzb/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdr
> aft-hollenbeck-regext-epp-delete-bcp%2F
>
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
> REGEXT
> and comment to this message on the list, clearly stating your view.
> Andy Newton already volunteered to be a document shepherd this item will
> be adopted.
>
> This Call For Adoption will close on Monday 12 February.
>
> If there are no objections, the chairs will consider this document adopted.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Your REGEXT co-chairs Jim and Antoin
>
> ___
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1o5csDW0rnh-
> iAPWNUpdQq33BxnAEya4jlO6c4ml3AKI788O3MH2DM0Q4gFDdgYHXqJGv-
> RlAWWSQs-
> 27cK0EhNm3RxBzzPLtSCAldnq4hlTuh60ME9PU0BWF4ZMHCRFYgGUYUwUa
> u5bq2ExFK78iI0Pc55mO_vvZ5wA2EpDL78Dq1hjgkzZEICpURFK5g-OSv-
> AfcLCIiJhMghsMsmE5HhwaQVE6F6BLIIPiCWroO-_YnOjj-iAwUq_0B-
> NzKsToAEjZMqq_siAcRfwpGf7SBq5n52Xh8AHPNW2-
> JiQyVrbwMdUmA168KN_iZlc2IEz-
> /https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext