[regext] quasi-technical terms (was Re: [Ext] Re-chartering REGEXT?)

["Andrew Newton (andy)" <[e-mail]>]

On 4/25/24 08:10, Maarten Wullink wrote:
> Improved scalability is one the stated goals and It’s true that just 
> by adding HTTP support, EPP would be able to leverage all of the 
> scalability features provided by HTTP.
>
> However, by using named resources in the URL (as is a feature of REST) 
> it would also be possible to include more advanced forms of load 
> balancing, such as routing requests based on the request URL pattern. 
> An example would be a configuration where informational requests such 
> the CHECK and INFO are separated from the creational requests such as 
> CREATE and UPDATE.
>
> And there’s also the other benefits linked to using RESTful APIs as 
> described.
>
To add to this point, cloud providers have many managed services geared 
towards helping smaller organizations that use REST-like services such 
as REPP. For example, REPP would allow a registry to use Web Application 
Firewalls (WAF) and Application Load Balancers (ALB). The separation of 
concerns also allows using managed security services for more granular 
control. And finally, the long-running TCP (or HTTP) sessions can't take 
advantage of the elastic container services in the same way REPP can.

While current industry players have already built out their 
infrastructure, for new entrants the ability to use these managed 
services greatly reduces overhead costs thus encouraging new market 
entrants.

> Yes, you are correct that REST is an architectural style and nothing 
> more, i should not have used “layered” for REST, only for HTTP
>
> Adding HATEOS was something we considered, the idea behind HATEOS is 
> to allow a server to be able to change the resource names without 
> breaking a client implementation, which may be useful in 
> non-standardized API’s. We decided that it would not be useful in the 
> context of EPP because when URL resources are defined in an IETF 
> standard, they are not very likely to change very often (if ever),
> And adding HATEOS would make the implementation more complex and bloat 
> server responses, also the vast majority of "RESTful” APIs do not 
> implement HATEOS.
>
> for those interested here is an interesting blog about this topic:
> https://www.ben-morris.com/pragmatic-rest-apis-without-hypermedia-and-hateoas/
>
Excellent link. Everybody should read that.

I agree with the decision to avoid HATEOS. We did that for RDAP as well, 
and RDAP is frequently described as "RESTful". I actually prefer the 
term "REST-like" but I also don't know if it really matters.


> Agree, and it is our goal to be 100% compatible with “standard EPP” on 
> this point.

This is a good goal. The hardest part about adopting a new protocol will 
not be the bits over the wire (call it a transport if you want) but 
changing data models and business practices. By re-using EPP, those 
problems can be avoided.


-andy