Re: [eppext] RDAP server of the registry

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <> Mon, 05 October 2015 17:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 676011B2A12 for <>; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0AWO1iLh9dd4 for <>; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:11:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1DAC1B29D3 for <>; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:11:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qgt47 with SMTP id 47so10466635qgt.0 for <>; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 10:11:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:thread-topic:thread-index :date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language :content-language:content-type:mime-version; bh=YjOKz0QkKPMzR2A5wnlfAqIlkC0yFl/gdMcwfZfyZDk=; b=KrtmsCh8k0Ky0huGAJ7yIbRq0ftTiJBxjxPMg29eK0id/k0/A/SEVEghIdDcoVixtj Xk0NVAS5WzLTpbprQC+OvdjFTcMwFS1T2gaa1dRRwAg/NB2D0WKz/Yz9oI1Z5rJlLa/4 3DoRY0TTKxXyA4dptAOytjeFQt5l4yWIgjIe3Kp7P0xZNW3IItecEOk7SxPRsatUc5IA mPKtVHrgUZZXhIw9iBrrlYvLVovGbW0jOkW+/ITOgBgROPHh583s52enBjzc2MkGuPkB 4KL8UJVdp6htcGzIM1WNpVt6xENcfTjFnMPKJjeRxqZKMVhNuTtQKiDPvfzvmDgGdnhq CFjw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmGFT/Uik/K6ipNdL/7u5qdLP8mz9xzoRabPdyJ9RSKA1YWdEK5f/LDaAuOAAgee431iAqXPQ+YcmPuQjL9lDArO2mfqw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id x195mr40961691qha.7.1444065083971; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 10:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPS id q23sm2952984qkl.5.2015. (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Oct 2015 10:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (brn1wnexcas02 []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t95HBNQP015143 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 5 Oct 2015 13:11:23 -0400
Received: from ([::1]) by ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 13:11:22 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <>
To: Gustavo Lozano <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: RDAP server of the registry
Thread-Index: AQHQ/3rntucFay3MHE6AZbmw28rIeZ5dIheg
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:11:22 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A0A9B8ABRN1WNEXMBX02vc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [eppext] RDAP server of the registry
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 17:11:27 -0000

Gustavo, I'd very much prefer to see the profile described in an I-D and developed using the IETF's consensus process. I'm also willing to back up that preference with writing help as needed. I'll have specific comments on the profile itself "soon".


From: EppExt [] On Behalf Of Gustavo Lozano
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 10:34 AM
Subject: [eppext] RDAP server of the registry


The first version of the ICANN gTLD profile was published days ago, (see:, this document describes basic parameters and objects to be implemented by ICANN-contracted parties.

The gTLD Whois output contains a field with the Whois server of the Registrar. In the case of thin registries, this allows the end user to get the registration data from the registrar, and in the case of thick registries, this allows the end user to query for extra Whois fields (e.g. registrar expiration date).

The gTLD profile support the same functionality with the following mechanism:

The RDAP domain lookup response MUST contain a links object as defined in RFC7483 section 4.2. The links object MUST contain the elements rel:related and href pointing to the Registrar's RDAP URL for the queried domain object.

Questions for this group:

* What do you think about this proposal? If you have different ideas on how to provide this functionality, please share it with the group.
* What is your opinion about documenting this mechanism in an I-D?

Gustavo Lozano