Re: [regext] EPP evolution and the REGEXT charter

Hi Jasdip,

IMO, REPP is not an "EPP extension" as defined by RFC5730. It provides 
neither just a switch of transport (like EoH and EoQ) nor an extension 
to EPP comands and responses.

Instead, it presents a full revision of EPP that maps some EPP features 
onto HTTP features.

Moreover, the current proposal is incompatible with some existing or 
future documents including extensions to EPP query commands (see Jody's 
question at last meeting about REPP compatibility with the Fee Extension).

On the contrary, in the spirit of achieving a full compliance with 
RFC5730, .it is going to update its EPP implementation that has been 
working since 2009.

With regard to a possible RegExt rechartering, I also don't think we 
need it.

RFC5730 already allows for implementing EPP over multiple transports. 
But it does even more, it makes some examples of possible alternatives 
to TCP.

Therefore, leaving aside for the moment the debate about considering a 
new transport as an extension or not, it would be paradoxical if the 
protocol itself admitted other transports than TCP but it wouldn't be 
allowed to standardize them just like it has been done for TCP :-(

Best,

Mario

Il 22/03/2024 01:12, Jasdip Singh ha scritto:
>
> Hi.
>
> Curious if the newly proposed “RESTful EPP” is considered a new 
> protocol that is different from EPP, or is it an “extension” of EPP? 
> (AFAICT, the former seems outside the current regext charter.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jasdip
>
> *From: *regext <regext-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Hollenbeck, 
> Scott <shollenbeck=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Date: *Friday, March 22, 2024 at 9:56 AM
> *To: *jgould=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org 
> <jgould=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, 
> maarten.wullink=40sidn.nl@dmarc.ietf.org 
> <maarten.wullink=40sidn.nl@dmarc.ietf.org>, regext@ietf.org 
> <regext@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [regext] EPP evolution and the REGEXT charter
>
> *From:*regext <regext-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Gould, James
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 21, 2024 7:49 PM
> *To:* maarten.wullink=40sidn.nl@dmarc.ietf.org; regext@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] EPP evolution and the REGEXT charter
>
> *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.
>
> Maarten,
>
> The charter refers to EPP extensions, which transports is a form of an 
> EPP extension.  RFC 5730 defines the extension points for EPP and 
> includes support for extending the transports based on Section 2.1 
> “Transport Mapping Considerations”.  I don’t believe that there is a 
> need to revise the REGEXT charter to support the additional of new EPP 
> transports.
>
> */[SAH] Agreed. New transport mappings are just another type of 
> extension as long as they preserve the data model described in RFC 5730./*
>
> *//*
>
> */Scott/*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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