Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search

Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it> Fri, 31 July 2020 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
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 039603A09AF for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 06:51:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 FSPlw_I85aFo for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 06:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.iit.cnr.it (mx4.iit.cnr.it [146.48.98.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F41323A095A for <regext@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 06:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.iit.cnr.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD422B803B8; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:51:38 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mx4.iit.cnr.it
Received: from smtp.iit.cnr.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.iit.cnr.it [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5xTSvvsg5XOy; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:51:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.12.193.108] (pc-loffredo.nic.it [192.12.193.108]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.iit.cnr.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBB7DB80183; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:51:35 +0200 (CEST)
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
References: <1cb2fde4261748afa8163333d090b84a@verisign.com> <df404a43-8284-5466-7d83-88e27d5691ef@iit.cnr.it> <4541e6d1530943e5bfd5c211a426ff82@verisign.com>
From: Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
Message-ID: <5d2ab8ae-563e-b244-10c6-ae8b90fc2d4b@iit.cnr.it>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:48:39 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4541e6d1530943e5bfd5c211a426ff82@verisign.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: it
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/XIl3_s3uaYUErClGE3Tbwwz2tjI>
Subject: Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:51:44 -0000

Hi Scott,

Il 31/07/2020 15:21, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
>> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:03 AM
>> To: Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck@verisign.com>om>; regext@ietf.org
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-
>> rdap-reverse-search
>>
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> thanks a lot for your feddback.
>>
>> Please find my comments to your feedback below.
>>
>> Il 31/07/2020 14:29, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto:
>>> draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search currently states that "This document
>> has no actions for IANA".  I believe that's primarily because there's nothing
>> new or different being returned in the search results, which is where RDAP
>> servers describe the features they support.
>> Exactly.
>>> There is, however, a case to be made for registering a value in the RDAP
>> extensions registry: a response to a help query (or any other query) can be
>> used to indicate that the server supports reverse search. I'd like to suggest
>> this change for Section 7:
>>> OLD:
>>> This document has no actions for IANA.
>>>
>>> NEW:
>>> IANA is requested to register the following value in the RDAP Extensions
>> Registry:
>>> Extension identifier: reverse_search_1_0 (or whatever makes sense)
>>> Registry operator: Any Published specification: This document.
>>> Contact: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
>>> Intended usage: This extension describes reverse search query patterns
>> for RDAP.
>>> Scott
>> I agree.
>>
>> Furthermore, my opinion is that Section 4.1 of RFC7483bis should be updated
>> to treat this use case. I mean, a server should signal in rdapConformance not
>> only the extensions used in building the response but all the supported
>> features.
> So maybe this?
>
> OLD:
> The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings, each providing a hint as to the specifications used in the construction of the response.
>
> NEW:
> The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings, each providing a hint as to the specifications that describe the query and response formats supported by the server.
>
> Scott

How about "query and response extensions" ?

Mario

-- 
Dr. Mario Loffredo
Systems and Technological Development Unit
Institute of Informatics and Telematics (IIT)
National Research Council (CNR)
via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy
Phone: +39.0503153497
Mobile: +39.3462122240
Web: http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo