Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it> Mon, 26 October 2020 15:44 UTC
Return-Path: <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
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 BBD773A0D3B for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 08:44:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.145
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V4MMoC5FRZgD for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 08:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.iit.cnr.it (mx5.iit.cnr.it [146.48.98.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB9C3A0D32 for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 08:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.iit.cnr.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAB1C04F5; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 16:44:24 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mx5.iit.cnr.it
Received: from smtp.iit.cnr.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx5.iit.cnr.it [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dczJKvIL6xRz; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 16:44:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.12.193.108] (pc-loffredo.nic.it [192.12.193.108]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.iit.cnr.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE0B1C03DB; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 16:44:20 +0100 (CET)
To: Antoin Verschuren <ietf@antoin.nl>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
References: <D394EB73-FAA1-42E2-899B-8E188A78411F@antoin.nl> <4A5F8A5D-32E6-4666-898F-23B83C5CDB18@elistx.com> <5eb56fa9e9f94347ae613e26d8a2fd62@verisign.com> <3FC1D211-8DB0-417E-AAB2-64D0B43CD814@antoin.nl>
From: Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
Message-ID: <00a25e6a-919c-9e93-f5cf-30d754df4709@iit.cnr.it>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 16:40:54 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3FC1D211-8DB0-417E-AAB2-64D0B43CD814@antoin.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------498B8E9BA54BB8670C1CA674"
Content-Language: it
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/F-qr4QKQ2sHkTPXWOiw1OPuFwDY>
Subject: Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 15:44:38 -0000
Hi Chairs, Il 26/10/2020 16:10, Antoin Verschuren ha scritto: > Thank you Scott and all others that replied during the extended WGLC.. > The chairs agree with the Authors that there was no consensus reached > during the extended WGLC to make changes to the document. > Therefor this WGLC is now officially closed. > We had 3 explicit statements of support for this document, and one > concern whose required changes were not supported by 3 others. > We will submit the document to the IESG as is. > > The document shepherd for this document is Mario Loffredo. > Mario, could you please start your shepherd writeup? I'll publish the shepherd writeup by tomorrow. Best, Mario > > Regards, > > Jim and Antoin > > > >> Op 12 okt. 2020, om 17:09 heeft Hollenbeck, Scott >> <shollenbeck=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org >> <mailto:shollenbeck=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> het volgende >> geschreven: >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: regext <regext-bounces@ietf.org >>> <mailto:regext-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of James Galvin >>> Sent: Friday, October 2, 2020 4:15 PM >>> To:regext@ietf.org <mailto:regext@ietf.org> >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: >>> draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis >>> >>> The WGLC for this document was scheduled to end today. While there is >>> support to move the document forward there is one minor comment that >>> has been raised during the last call. >>> >>> The chairs would like to hear from other working group members as to >>> what >>> to do with this comment. Rather than close the last call and risk >>> another last >>> call, we are extending this last call for another week. If we can >>> come to a >>> consensus as to how to proceed before the end of last call than the >>> document can stay on track to be submitted to the IESG after the >>> last call. >>> >>> The WG last call will end at close of business on Friday, 9 October >>> 2020. >>> >>> >>> Here are the comments as seen on the mailing list. Please respond with >>> your suggestions regarding these two comments. >>> >>> >>> James Gould: >>> >>> Yes, lumping the registrar object with the contact object under a single >>> RDAP entity object interface is the rub. We solved the problem in the >>> RDAP Profile, by supporting entity lookup by IANA ID (number) and >>> registrar name (string) for the registrar objects, and by ROID >>> (“((\w|_){1,80}-\w{1,8}") for the contact objects. Where there is >>> overlap, which is registrar name (string) and ROID >>> ((“((\w|_){1,80}-\w{1,8}") the contact takes precedence. My >>> recommendation is to provide guidance in the section 3.1.5 "Entity Path >>> Segment Specification" for this real world case: >>> >>> The <handle> parameter represents an entity (such as a contact, >>> registrant, or registrar) identifier whose syntax is specific to the >>> registration provider. For example, for some DNRs, contact >>> identifiers are specified in [RFC5730] and [RFC5733], and >>> registrar identifiers are specified using the IANA Registrar ID >>> assigned by ICANN. The server SHOULD define a scheme >>> for the <handle> parameter to differentiate between the >>> supported entity object types (e.g., contact and registrar), >>> such as using different <handle> formats, using a <handle> >>> precedence order, or a combination of formats and precedence >>> order. >>> >>> The SHOULD could be a MUST, but the point is to provide guidance to >>> implementers of the protocol. >>> >>> Two responses have been offered: >>> >>> Jasdip Singh response: >>> >>> One thought is if it could be in the RDAP profile doc for the DNRs >>> (https://secure-web.cisco.com/1k4lL- >>> ZaH_4UTeAlExqEDmWoj2i2M2JCucgN0US- >>> ZRaw3P13LwsVyTwARJxQoKgUo1ceNGMGoZaum_o86c9qFXMK28e6HYprdo >>> vBXG6JQKzs1SqqT5mQ_VEnMihHl3qiwMkTQ8qPKkPpbqOJbRIDs_UDppLFz2 >>> yhs97pm3Ssnh2DxotUzdWsgbWlESVZbLzMg5Z- >>> ZTHevue2cVlwSwhdDlzQiyDBU4e0y9cLgcwXSXX7tJE5mUh04ocHwUI2Kcpqccf >>> u_lM- >>> d8029rv314sSAKQ/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org >>> <http://2fwww.icann.org/>%2Fresources%2Fpages >>> %2Frdap-operational-profile-2016-07-26-en). >>> That way no need to update the spec. >>> >>> James Gould response: >>> >>> The RDAP Profile is dependent on the RFC, so I wouldn't create a >>> circular dependency. My recommendation is to take the lessons learned >>> in implementing the RFC and provide guidance on how to handle it in the >>> RFC directly. >> >> [SAH] I don't think we reached consensus to change anything in the >> draft, so I left this one alone. >> >> Scott >> _______________________________________________ >> regext mailing list >> regext@ietf.org <mailto:regext@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext > > > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list > regext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext -- Dr. Mario Loffredo Systems and Technological Development Unit Institute of Informatics and Telematics (IIT) National Research Council (CNR) via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy Phone: +39.0503153497 Mobile: +39.3462122240 Web: http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo
- [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482b… Antoin Verschuren
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Tom Harrison
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Mario Loffredo
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Roger D Carney
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Gould, James
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Gould, James
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Jasdip Singh
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Gould, James
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… James Galvin
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Mario Loffredo
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Gould, James
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Jasdip Singh
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Gould, James
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Tom Harrison
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Thomas Corte (TANGO support)
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Tom Harrison
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Antoin Verschuren
- Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7… Mario Loffredo