[regext] Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed-05

"Andrew Newton (andy)" <andy@hxr.us> Thu, 18 July 2024 19:19 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@hxr.us>
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 2213AC15154F for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.904
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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=hxr-us.20230601.gappssmtp.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 AMwACcSgLwZB for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x232.google.com (mail-oi1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB14CC15109C for <regext@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x232.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3d6301e7279so743230b6e.3 for <regext@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hxr-us.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1721330351; x=1721935151; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rUk5IsCc4hfbAiJ6o887+Bu/P0aGobeiOhTas1bb69g=; b=miXsX4eUVK+WHaudAlNTFq/dGxRQYLPsSM7xp8NRpKaVjHtPO1EawVuW7x3tuu0ez9 UXStvD4+OdZ70dgFLpUDymBHUjI2JrM7DS5FZvzUGFAC/UMp1eWSewfEL0YN5SDRAVKV Z8w8DqSK+q/I/pTnV36AHrr3cGB5aR34x8l+35MhRJ/RvXi27Pz6tnVijneqI1wjdKWC BQTmj7dHgTJn086Mgba0EQcHtDhwPWQFsy8yA/53s8ufDObn1SQkGsg3VMoDwmurgPEU tBa16N4bnm/WP0EFA1O1TZVRGKSYK9HPbO7Mei9PYZDRI8Kx5fUpe3CvEPvvycUgMODX whdA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1721330351; x=1721935151; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rUk5IsCc4hfbAiJ6o887+Bu/P0aGobeiOhTas1bb69g=; b=c4QKhaXwXPYWBd6geq0BFZNYMQ8xUzG09f9wmV106+G+rfTKAaRbzjujMdH4eRawcA 8OH9xZA3fVpkjtEfPsGcGb0gbFiUTv4gixEV3rQtRYPazBAnNnqjmBCXnwBH4GTTd0Jb GeSIbEbJebB60/nXxOVPD3wGm3D8jBtXEpMlmPKFozkttBq2WagRaf9OObu35xXgyzjW vQa4QN/+ky8/CjMqEdMfK+BvotY9i8MVMhsbsT1TwyweosB/Di57Iuq0CAG6BT3d0qsY KQ+lWy4c7u22MudFMkVMO058oUfPNIKdYYgPuRv8f2qv/v85twOTiElOvQMu6alOj6O6 nkqA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzscGf7xyF4xjKT6H7gqHKrOBzy7f/TYTkty/IzwB9NMjJXs0+L yVzkTGtDhBnYWcRc6lTbzcEO8DCbUX2EliGD5YUBTpFsmcUKciCmOk+wXCOaXbqHje0ZKBRtzMw 7
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEutRqCOLkxB19b9CmX/sV4Rk6bas9QFzF7dmtWhLOBpYA58HQ2I+PNntYVuHCjE2gM3r1Ogw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:f8c:b0:3d9:40c2:eb54 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3dad1f1236amr5079626b6e.5.1721330350919; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.2.8.160] (pool-72-83-25-32.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [72.83.25.32]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-7a19394f437sm56199285a.83.2024.07.18.12.19.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Jul 2024 12:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <72adbded-39af-42dc-9971-6e9ff69bfc59@hxr.us>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:19:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: REGEXT Working Group <regext@ietf.org>, "jasdips@arin.net" <jasdips@arin.net>, tomh@apnic.net
References: <9AE89B13-D3D1-4D15-8EAA-105CCFA0F540@elistx.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: "Andrew Newton (andy)" <andy@hxr.us>
In-Reply-To: <9AE89B13-D3D1-4D15-8EAA-105CCFA0F540@elistx.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID-Hash: 3G6G72WOHVMBJ5CVNJHUFSUTB7M2MMDR
X-Message-ID-Hash: 3G6G72WOHVMBJ5CVNJHUFSUTB7M2MMDR
X-MailFrom: andy@hxr.us
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: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [regext] Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed-05
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions Working Group <regext.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/EFPH5vFAconkCEEk_LHPAhs4LEg>
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>

Hi Jasdip and Tom,

I like this draft, but I do have a couple of questions.

1. This draft mentions the ip network object class but none of the other 
object classes. Are those not allowed by this extension? What happens if 
a server uses a geofeed link in a domain object? Should that be covered 
under a different extension? What if bigisp.com wants to allow other 
network operators to find their geofeeds just by looking up bigisp.com 
in RDAP? That seems like it might be a useful thing. If not, are clients 
to ignore processing the link if found any object other than an ip network?

2. Do the IPs in the geofeed file have to be in the IP boundaries of the 
ip network object class where the link is found? That doesn't look to be 
a requirement, but perhaps this should be explicitly stated.

3. What is a client to do if it finds the geofeed link in a response 
without a "geofeed1" extension? Is it suppose to treat the link as if 
the response had a "geofeed1" extension? The expectation of client 
processing should be more explicit in this allowable corner case.

-andy

On 7/12/24 17:12, James Galvin wrote:
> The document editors have indicated that the following document is ready for submission to the IESG to be considered for publication as a Proposed Standard:
>
> An RDAP Extension for Geofeed Data
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed/
>
> Please indicate your support or no objection for the publication of this document by replying to this message on list (a simple “+1” is sufficient).
>
> If any working group member has questions regarding the publication of this document please respond on the list with your concerns by close of business everywhere, Friday, 2 August 2024.  This WGLC has been extended to 3 weeks because of the IETF120 meeting.
>
> If there are no objections the document will be submitted to the IESG.
>
> The Document Shepherd for this document is Gavin Brown.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoin and Jim
> REGEXT WG Co-Chairs
>
> _______________________________________________
> regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to regext-leave@ietf.org