Re: [regext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-belyavskiy-epp-eai-01.txt

Dear James,

If we indicate in the EPP greeting/Login support
of urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0
for old contact scheme without EAI and urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.1
for a new scheme with EAI, will it be enough?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 10:53 PM Gould, James <jgould@verisign.com> wrote:

> Dmitry,
>
>
>
> The mechanism that we’ve used in the past is signaling support in the EPP
> greeting and login services.  Support for an EPP extension is signaled per
> RFC in the EPP greeting and login services.  We signal support for an
> operation practice via defining an XML namespace that is included in the
> EPP greeting and login services.  See
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer-03#section-3
> for signaling support for draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer, and
> see
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-03#section-4
> for signaling support for draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces.
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> JG
>
>
>
>
>
> *James Gould *Fellow Engineer
> jgould@Verisign.com
>
> 703-948-3271
> 12061 Bluemont Way
> Reston, VA 20190
>
> Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/>
>
>
>
> *From: *regext <regext-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Dmitry Belyavsky <
> beldmit@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday, October 12, 2020 at 3:16 PM
> *To: *John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
> *Cc: *"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <
> regext@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Fwd: New Version Notification for
> draft-belyavskiy-epp-eai-01.txt
>
>
>
> We could update the contact scheme version to indicate the EAI support as
> it is relevant for the contract mapping only.
>
>
>
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020, 18:51 John Levine, <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
> In article <542572b0e6284550a9bee035bea2d6bf@verisign.com> you write:
> >   [SAH] Perhaps there’s a case to be made for RFC 6530 being an update
> to RFC 5322. I’m going to see if I can run some tests to
> >confirm it, but I, too, suspect that EPP as-is won’t have any issues with
> internationalized email addresses.
>
> Urrgh.  RFC 6530 is not an update to 5322.  Don't go there.  I agree there
> is no
> great technical problem sending UTF-8 address strings through EPP.
>
> I'm getting the impression that what we need is a way for the client
> to ask the registry whether it can handle EAI addresses so it knows
> what to accept registrants.  I can imagine a variety of ways to do that.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1E2O9BAxjfPFRfBkfkdxxMTw4FeUHvpkoq0D8pXADkch3J8zQcnJFteI9-DnviuVEI5t6W5sTnonl8zXd9JKRrx-gGoGyQXdMImvWtBZf9dYNpujyBnEMqxC1Ly9rBkcppwn1Q8waImJkzHzgPSR5W076Bq_Qj1fvERIlfLyfP1t5QgoTwZ2gpmuX85-A2Z_DzpzUdNJ-F5_W-JNHhs7NJcXcs3bEciqsCWn8Pogs9sG9e5TijoAKpJc7gqcV6DlHoJghQ11jLtbMvnQ48zpr3_uROAOzByjqHEoLAyKKmWY/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext>
>
>

-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky

Re: [regext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-belyavskiy-epp-eai-01.txt

Attachment: image001.png