IETF Logo Mail Archive

[regext] Re: Extension Identifiers in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com> Wed, 09 October 2024 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 439D7C14F6E4 for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=verisign.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O7ImZNgqc4Lr for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:48:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.verisign.com (mail1.verisign.com [72.13.63.30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA34C14F69F for <regext@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:48:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=verisign.com; l=7380; q=dns/txt; s=VRSN; t=1728488900; h=from:to:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version:subject; bh=qzJAwMgP3Uhh791sHEKEKVqvEOYeYY+43rgOCtKrkus=; b=CGDypWmrDafZCZEbRABxMDElrJhJ7R46/mkboy7UrtFkF3lRM7LQ6bqs UcfPg9ANDmfcwa9AxEZLIDMYTUzK1gvHfudkxo7cNL3CDrKyi2AW5+FPH xx7o7m56lLwwvlJLMrRXDw4a5c514pXWiZq3q+mD9oh3wteEM9KfBtNth /ipbNP4Ay677jz/e6IRNyldodkRYViHel5jU745msS4zN/HmB/KMTTLsH 9jw8rxSdP+l6UfL4xeiYQhF2fwCkCcJT84iz4nKjUTi0H0NLJqg22qS/d N5ooaRCWJAeLwB0x6VbDHSUH6zZiXIbZ0IZKx1BzBWAbEAnXXkDiSRYB+ A==;
X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Vh244A5+Q1WtQRPH7dQ6JQ==
X-CSE-MsgGUID: FqHAlr7WTECuvcU1cEf8dA==
X-ThreatScanner-Verdict: Negative
IronPort-Data: A9a23:Uxm61aIqV2qn+dyjFE+Rr5QlxSXFcZb7ZxGr2PjKsXjdYENSg2BVm zMeX2mFOfuMYGGkLo1wbt618EwOsZ/TndJrHgForCE8RH908seUXt7xwmUcnc+xBpaaEB84t ZV2hv3odp1coqr0/0/1WlTZhSAhk/zOHPykUb6s1hlZHWdMUD0mhQ9oh9k3i4tphcnRKw6Ws LsemeWGULOe82Ayazt8B56r8ks14K2q4GJA5DTSWNgQ1LPgvyhNZH4gDfzpR5fIatE8NvK3Q e/F0Ia48gvxlz8xCsmom6rMaUYDRLjfJ2Cm0hK6jID733CuDgRrukoKHKJ0hXV/0l1lrPgoo Dl5jqFcfC9yVkH6sL9ED0QHSXEW0Zpuo9crKVDn2SCa5xOeLyu0m52CBmluVWET0r4f7W2ja ZX0gd3CB/yOr7ve/V61dgVjrvojdpW3Fd5cgyhf0QjjNdZ5TamdYZyfsLe03B9o7ixPNdzkQ ZMmTxdfNE6GfRZIIE9RAZ54gv2zgD/0dDgwRFC9/PJxujeIilUsi/6xYbI5efTTLSlRtl2Yo WbC8mLzDxoZHMKS0zue832qwOTImEsXXapOTOTmqq8w0TV/wEQ9ET0/UUHknsWUoVOgUO8GI GEaqiYH+P1aGEuDC4OVsweDiHeCsg80W8pKVfAhgCmXx6XZ8xqxB2UYQHhGctNOiSMtbTYw0 AaWmd75XWYqq6OPD3ec7fKeqnW4Iy5Ma3EYfilCRgwAizX+nLwOYtv0Zo4LOMaIYhfdQFkcH xjiQPACuogu
IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:WyO3RqNBlyf8RcBcTvSjsMiBIKoaSvp037By7TEVdfUnSL39qy nOpoVi6faaslcssR0b8+xofZPwI080lqQFmrX5X43DYOCOggLBR72Kr7GSoAEIcBeTygcp78 ldmt9FZ+EYY2IWsS+w2njeLz9p+qjgzEmHv5am80tQ
X-Talos-CUID: 9a23:+BCfUWnxLz0MXb+LBC6VMUjuYB7XOUPdliuMChL7MD9WVISvcX/P9Jo6sfM7zg==
X-Talos-MUID: 9a23:CShqdgugf/BNWy/jwc2nqihCHcNyvJuSJWsQj5474sKpO3x8EmLI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,190,1725321600"; d="scan'208,217";a="40164929"
Received: from BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.49) by BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.37; Wed, 9 Oct 2024 11:48:18 -0400
Received: from BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.173.153.49]) by BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.173.153.49]) with mapi id 15.01.2507.037; Wed, 9 Oct 2024 11:48:18 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
To: "andy@hxr.us" <andy@hxr.us>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Extension Identifiers in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search
Thread-Index: AdsaPip0cznAP657TjyZ6zJ7iqI+UwARPK2AAAhFxvA=
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2024 15:48:18 +0000
Message-ID: <0c1a0521a95d4e01b3c96fa4b6650c6b@verisign.com>
References: <85a84477f52642af954774eaeeaf2953@verisign.com> <b6719fc5-1653-4220-98a9-b2b627526e0a@hxr.us>
In-Reply-To: <b6719fc5-1653-4220-98a9-b2b627526e0a@hxr.us>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.170.148.18]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0c1a0521a95d4e01b3c96fa4b6650c6bverisigncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID-Hash: RJEJX5GDWPTJLOYS2Q2NVLKOU4RT6ZAE
X-Message-ID-Hash: RJEJX5GDWPTJLOYS2Q2NVLKOU4RT6ZAE
X-MailFrom: shollenbeck@verisign.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-regext.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc5
Precedence: list
Subject: [regext] Re: Extension Identifiers in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions Working Group <regext.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/Dho8Wnmg0m7HW70qe1obZ-YJZwE>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:regext-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:regext-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:regext-leave@ietf.org>


From: Andrew Newton (andy) <andy@hxr.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 11:41 AM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck@verisign.com>; regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Extension Identifiers in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search



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.

Scott,

This was discussed in this working group on this list by me and others. I even proposed something similar. However, absent some functional deficiency or harm, I do not favor re-opening this issue post WGLC. It may not have been the way I would have done it, but to my knowledge it works and no reviews found fault.

I am also confused by your suggestion. In another thread you are arguing against child path segments, yet your proposal below uses them.

[SAH] Non-compliance with Standard 95 isn’t an issue, even if it’s identified before the draft leaves the working group? Sigh…

I’ve never argued against the use of child path segments. Besides, those examples are from the draft. They’re not something I made up.

The “domains” collision is an issue. We can deal with it now, or during IETF last call.

Scott

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status