IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis

Jasdip Singh <jasdips@arin.net> Thu, 24 September 2020 16:39 UTC

Return-Path: <jasdips@arin.net>
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 DBDFB3A109B for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:39:01 -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, 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 VgdeXRvpybqK for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:39:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.arin.net (smtp2.arin.net [IPv6:2001:500:110:201::52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71EBA3A1096 for <regext@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:39:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net (cas02cha.corp.arin.net [10.1.30.63]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp2.arin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B51A910757B3; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:38:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net (10.1.30.63) by CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net (10.1.30.63) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:38:37 -0400
Received: from CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net ([fe80::70b5:fa43:96a0:efad]) by CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net ([fe80::70b5:fa43:96a0:efad%17]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:38:37 -0400
From: Jasdip Singh <jasdips@arin.net>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "jgould=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org" <jgould=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "ietf@antoin.nl" <ietf@antoin.nl>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis
Thread-Index: AQHWkPBOa7uXIa6dAUepW5vf0QhuCql4QTsA//+/SgA=
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:38:37 +0000
Message-ID: <99F18DC1-A15B-4FD3-918E-BC141909900D@arin.net>
References: <3FFD145A-50E9-4529-B8C2-6B3AFA93403F@verisign.com> <23edd33fe12b45bda8877e906e669abf@verisign.com>
In-Reply-To: <23edd33fe12b45bda8877e906e669abf@verisign.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.136.136.37]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <BB9DF794823879408C6E1A0A50FCA620@corp.arin.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/XPnxyMZxmK2fr21wOmIEjtobKns>
Subject: Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis
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, 24 Sep 2020 16:39:02 -0000

Hello Scott, James.

Seems if the RDAP profile for the DNRs (https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdap-operational-profile-2016-07-26-en) could clarify this, the spec could be left as-is.

Jasdip

On 9/24/20, 12:30 PM, "regext on behalf of Hollenbeck, Scott" <regext-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of shollenbeck=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: regext <regext-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Gould, James
    > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 10:55 AM
    > To: ietf@antoin.nl; regext@ietf.org
    > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis
    >
    > I have one item to bring up with draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis, which is
    > associated with Section 5.1 “The Entity Object Class”.   The jCard "version"
    > and "fn" members are required according to RFC 6350, which poses an issue
    > if a contact name does not exist or needs to be redacted.  To address this
    > case, I recommend adding a sentence to the end of section 3 "Common Data
    > Types":
    >
    > Contact information is defined using jCards as described in [RFC7095].  The
    > “version” and “fn” members are required according to [RFC6350], where an
    > empty “fn” member MAY be used when the contact name does not exist or
    > is redacted.
    
    I'd like to see some discussion of this suggestion. If one understands the normative references, the suggestion is already implicitly addressed. There may be some value in describing this situation explicitly since it came up in the ICANN gTLD implementation context, but so others think this clarification is necessary?
    
    Scott
    _______________________________________________
    regext mailing list
    regext@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email