Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-org-ext-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Linlin Zhou" <zhoulinlin@cnnic.cn> Thu, 01 November 2018 03:27 UTC

Return-Path: <zhoulinlin@cnnic.cn>
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 C9066130DF5; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 20:27:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 KW5D2bIHRI5l; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 20:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D8D130DE1; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 20:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zll (unknown [218.241.111.73]) by ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0AZIPx+ctpbTLYFAA--.4980S2; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 11:26:54 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 11:28:10 +0800
From: "Linlin Zhou" <zhoulinlin@cnnic.cn>
To: "Benjamin Kaduk" <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: regext-chairs <regext-chairs@ietf.org>, "Pieter Vandepitte" <pieter.vandepitte@dnsbelgium.be>, iesg <iesg@ietf.org>, regext <regext@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-regext-org-ext <draft-ietf-regext-org-ext@ietf.org>
References: <154032201955.31253.2132106938902168352.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>, <2018102511294175966596@cnnic.cn>, <20181025172816.GB45914@kduck.kaduk.org>, <2018103010160489184930@cnnic.cn>, <20181031010506.GY45914@kduck.kaduk.org>, <20181031141945204989108@cnnic.cn>, <20181031124321.GH45914@kduck.kaduk.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7, 2, 5, 136[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2018110111280976085295@cnnic.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart421825566233_=----"
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0AZIPx+ctpbTLYFAA--.4980S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW7uw47ur4xXryfZr1kJw4DXFb_yoW8CrW5pr WUWa47KF1DJryxG3s7Zw1qg34FvFWSyrWDWF1Ygr18Ka98W3ZrtF1ayF1Svw1UWa1Fqr1Y qw4UK34Ygw1DAFJanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUmvb7Iv0xC_Cr1lb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I2 0VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rw A2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Xr0_Ar1l84ACjcxK6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr0_Gr1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_Cr1j6rxdM28EF7xvwV C2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW0oVCq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40En4AK xVAvwIkv4cxYr24l5I8CrVCF0I0E4I0vr24lYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4 A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvY0x0EwIxGrwACY4xI 67k04243AVAKzVAKj4xxM4xvF2IEb7IF0Fy26I8I3I1l7480Y4vEI4kI2Ix0rVAqx4xJMx kIecxEwVAFwVW8GwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s02 6c02F40E14v26r106r1rMI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_JF 0_Jw1lIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvE c7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWUJVWrZr1UMIIF0xvEx4A2js IE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Gr0_Gr1UMVCEFcxC0VAYjxAxZFUv cSsGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IU0FPftUUUUU==
X-CM-SenderInfo: p2kr3zplqox0w6fq0xffof0/
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/OLgiuB_oQHQo5XrFJat-pugneL4>
Subject: Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-org-ext-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 03:27:10 -0000

Dear Benjamin,
I found that following sections may be the proper place to restrict the 1-to-1 mapping. I think we can have restrictions in section 3.1 only or in 3.1&4.2.1&4.2.5. I've not decided which one is better and hope to have others' suggestions.

1. In section 3.1 Organization Identifier, add sentences at the end of this paragraph.
A "role" attribute is used to represent the relationship that the organization has to the EPP object. Any given object MUST have at most one associated organization ID for any given role value.

2. In section 4.2.1,
One or more <orgext:id> elements that contain the identifier of the organization. The "role" attribute is used to represent the relationship that the organization has to the object. Any given object MUST have at most one associated organization ID for any given role value. See Section 7.3 in [ID.draft-ietf-regext-org] for a list of values.

3. In section 4.2.5
One or more <orgext:id> elements that contain the identifier of the organization. The "role" attribute is used to represent the relationship that the organization has to the object. Any given object MUST have at most one associated organization ID for any given role value. See Section 7.3 in [ID.draft-ietf-regext-org] for a list of values. 

If we have the restrictions, the 1-to-multiple mapping cases are not necessary to be specified in this document.

Regards,
Linlin


Linlin Zhou
 
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Date: 2018-10-31 20:43
To: Linlin Zhou
CC: regext-chairs; Pieter Vandepitte; iesg; regext; draft-ietf-regext-org-ext
Subject: Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-org-ext-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Dear Linlin,
 
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 02:19:45PM +0800, Linlin Zhou wrote:
> Dear Benjamin,
> Thanks for your input. We believe that relationship between an object and an organization should be 1-to-1, one organization ID with just one role. 1-to-many is an exception for the organization extension. Indeed that is our concern, "the multiple examples may be overkill". Many thanks.
 
I won't object to requiring the 1-to-1 mapping, as the impact of the
restriction seems minor.  I am not entirely sure where the best place to
add some text that clarifies this restriction would be; perhaps in Section
4.2.1 where we describe the <orgext:id> elements in <create>?  (I assume
that the formal syntax does not provide for a maxOccurs that applies
per-type.)  It may also be worth a (non-normative) reminder in the <update>
description that the semantics of <orgext:chg> are well-defined because
there is only one entry per role value, but I'm not sure about that.
 
Thanks,
 
Benjamin
 
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext