Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

"Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com> Mon, 16 July 2018 10:58 UTC

Return-Path: <jgould@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 70A51130E7C for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 03:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mpWZFcxWHkLM for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 03:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail3.verisign.com (mail3.verisign.com [72.13.63.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD97D130E50 for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 03:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=verisign.com; l=5170; q=dns/txt; s=VRSN; t=1531738729; h=from:to:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=mDB6sALPA/zAwH4LcPb0MIPFzw73+4hr7v6mAwC5HGA=; b=aAyp0OSjjY/lUFpaQctXqEGtPO++oOOiPnTU+DSKcVOWImdUF9Kit9xB Hjt+FIrHR3geRygbSki3YKZiH7Ex6hxD+tcM5+T+3oVECmU/CQtun+2EZ P5Wqk+oEGLvvnr/sxUtzMe+avlHHdc5XRv2//ZX4l72gndQYQp7xDsRhQ QuFaLVT5RZxDcAS5iA5tnvTHJP77o7tYK1HgHK3gNgHQND2VzJA00Qep6 BrOs/q6q8DBiYhvBcH/t8yagzqxz5VQzVSCrkNOnnCWpOcYahB8jQtWKq 8Jn44DuX79acUGZJo6etFn60hDxcqdGDTZrtjbflMVjDF/AkRKVtbsPwD Q==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,360,1526342400"; d="scan'208";a="5204664"
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23: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
X-IPAS-Result: A2GUAQDweUxb/zCZrQpZAxwBAQEEAQEKAQGELIEnCoNyiASORoM4kgGBPxcdBwsYCwuDeEYCF4JoNBgBAgEBAQEBAQIBAQKBBQyCNSQBDi8cLwgBBQEBAQEBAScBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEIAggHNRIBARkBAQEDAQEhETobAgEIDgoCAhIBDAcCAgIlCxUQAgQBEoMgAYIOqTOBLoo+gQuJTz6BESeCaoMZAQGBOBIWFwomAQKCNzGCJAKZXAMGAoYIhU2FE0OGO4UkijcChzQCBAIEBQIUgUGCC3AVOyoBgj4JgkSDNIUUhT5vDSOLJg2BH4EaAQE
Received: from BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.48) by BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1466.3; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 06:58:47 -0400
Received: from BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::a89b:32d6:b967:337d]) by BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::a89b:32d6:b967:337d%5]) with mapi id 15.01.1466.003; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 06:58:47 -0400
From: "Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com>
To: Patrick Mevzek <pm@dotandco.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)
Thread-Index: AQHT49WnnwTzyLEBw0SOW88aL7whS6QmKzqAgBPD7QCAAGWAgIABYqaAgAAQhYCAAuGMAIAARSUAgCEPOQCAMfPRAIAALsaA
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:58:47 +0000
Message-ID: <CAA54B81-CA94-47C1-84B0-D7560DA6A86D@verisign.com>
References: <3266784A-E663-4465-8ABF-A3305B83C253@verisign.com> <BEC1040F-25C7-4F52-BB94-1F55BFA4C1C7@verisign.com> <1524203922.4022062.1344535160.39F0C10F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <83479150-4E98-452F-B27B-BD286AA18C1B@verisign.com> <1524425212.2370983.1346768616.2A2DE208@webmail.messagingengine.com> <48889EC8-FF2C-4CF3-B5E1-9DC5482E06E9@verisign.com> <CF701CA2-F63A-4573-AB87-68E3AB30C635@elistx.com> <5743B914-A1C7-426C-B0AA-515A3AEB5C72@verisign.com> <CY4PR02MB254962B12D6D196EACE492AEB1860@CY4PR02MB2549.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <8A5C829F-BB67-4BA2-8E3E-5A4002D7D2CA@dnsbelgium.be> <1526875928.815044.1378899224.71EFB177@webmail.messagingengine.com> <F9BD7DC9-8472-438E-BDDD-8658A0D0A841@verisign.com> <1526973885.2320203.1380323248.3A725D0E@webmail.messagingengine.com> <96AC029A-47E4-4729-8297-571F9A34FE6C@verisign.com> <1527135820.1779071.1382936736.3093914E@webmail.messagingengine.com> <2c568201-aa94-3c74-a708-33f3b97bc4f3@switch.ch> <da81c99b-a578-2c63-e383-a94edb66f991@switch.ch> <1531714294.3398019.1441786632.086C1E31@webmail.messagingengine.com>
In-Reply-To: <1531714294.3398019.1441786632.086C1E31@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.e.1.180613
x-originating-ip: [10.170.148.18]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <742F435F565FC64782E40EE4AFC70E7C@verisign.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/KWqBtzAoK-7ZCS8SQU9p-ozs5xA>
Subject: Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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, 16 Jul 2018 10:58:51 -0000

Patrick,

In this case the server is communicating an error condition, but the condition does not result in an error code being returned.  A poll message really cannot fail, otherwise you get into the poison message scenario.  Even if we disagreed that this is an error condition, the RFC 5730 description does not use a normative SHOULD or MUST so it can be used in a 1301 response .  The <extValue> element can contain the entire extension XML along with a reason for each unhandled extension for later processing.  By inclusion of the unhandled XML in the <extValue> element, the client can get the entire poll message for acking, and there is no issue with returning extensions that may cause client-side XML parsing errors or marshaling errors.  
  
—
 
JG



James Gould
Distinguished Engineer
jgould@Verisign.com

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> 

On 7/16/18, 12:11 AM, "regext on behalf of Patrick Mevzek" <regext-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of pm@dotandco.com> wrote:

    On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, at 11:22, Martin Casanova wrote:
    > While implementing, another idea came to mind, which I want to put to
    > discussion here:
    > 
    > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
    > <epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
    >   <response>
    >     <result code="1301">
    >       <msg lang="en">Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
    > 
    >       <extValue>
    >         <value>
    >           <extURI>urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:changePoll-1.0</extURI>
    >         </value>
    >         <reason lang="en">Msg incomplete due to missing extURI at login
    > cmd! To fix include at epp/command/login/svcs/svcExtension/extURI</reason>
    >       </extValue>
    >       <extValue>
    >         <value>
    >           <extURI>urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:secDNS-1.1</extURI>
    >         </value>
    >         <reason lang="en">Msg incomplete due to missing extURI at login
    > cmd! To fix include at : epp/command/login/svcs/svcExtension/extURI</reason>
    >       </extValue>
    
    
    First on a technical level, replying to registrar basically "fix your client", is not really something nice, nor what registries should be doing.
    Notifications are external to registrars, they can appear without any action triggered by them so basically you are filling their "inbox" with some external messages they may or may not care about, and then you are taxing them of being bad because they can not read all messages, and maybe they would not like to.
    
    Some registrars may wish, for their own reasons, not to support some extensions and then at the same time you can not have one message in their queue that blocks all others after.
    
    But more important, on a technical level, I believe the spirit of RFC5730 is that value/extValue element appears for *error messages*, that is all having code 2000 or more. Hence they would not fit for a 1301 return code.
     
    Also note:
    A <value> element that identifies a client-provided element
                (including XML tag and value) that caused a server error
                condition.
    
    
    => a client-provided element... the message you describe is in the response of a poll command by a client, and this poll command has none of that data you put in the <value> element of the server reply.
    
    
    So while I see the underlying idea, I think you are bending RFC5730 quite a lot to achieve it.
    
    -- 
      Patrick Mevzek
      pm@dotandco.com
    
    _______________________________________________
    regext mailing list
    regext@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext