IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-03

Patrick Mevzek <pm@dotandco.com> Mon, 02 November 2020 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <pm@dotandco.com>
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 DB04F3A11CF for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:09:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dotandco.com header.b=Ac9SGznY; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=PDBrS6tv
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 qWuNKg0cTufL for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C06DA3A11D7 for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80935C01EA for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:09:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap22 ([10.202.2.72]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 02 Nov 2020 10:09:57 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dotandco.com; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=IHAir0YUlC8KEwIhmlpq2urqUWNOVTl 1arynB9BERYk=; b=Ac9SGznYgD+F5I9yMTuta85jH5O6MFuZgrtRaGisuOTaS97 LGNSmQSnE/k8N3rgm3llrRUvtaOAWUHx5N9MGC3EZwnS2BAAoGXI0RPrVNscRm7S IAMlKz6c1Nd9F75okCx9Y5mtYXK8w37HWfNtu0BXplLZ0xhGAPm1LODSsdM63J8S M6//CmcgAdzweg6H2XPewu8ezSq5qjN/hd3ekEcNVzi0Bp50w8PelI5Bp17GVIhl KWm5d68+DGaH71RSGrm9cBakTSk+/jlSLsrDccczJeZCX1uEcw71s2MfK9SZeoNG ATtRy/yuyToEwmB0QZjH24TJ7Sb2eun6iGCL4Tg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=IHAir0 YUlC8KEwIhmlpq2urqUWNOVTl1arynB9BERYk=; b=PDBrS6tvV7QzHD1iB1bd3+ Zn5IAtN3dntFe2hQ+QlWkAY9b02zevyfJe21gqkms7SIiXcB/BaP/lQ+uUK9lnEg sKxtw019ndXIwyMgRR/MvN2W9xdUmZgc3sdOmRbOLt7hiAD3rpqWelP6Drtrkepv V1gNK1EBvy8gqvu/63B16mhtaOD3DxXDcerD780+zmgbVuK2+mQTinlyWZZhQitc 06gPMTm3gqF/M45QWYkNN0n3mcvffsZWynYi9ugf5W91vIZozByZybVHBEBua2Uw nxHFfWgHF3f6WiC3fXHvNS0j8PnNX9T4+CFH6eGC7DfEAa26waf+XHi06HPX8Jig ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:RCGgX3lIygl8uoe3uw55oRQ1BrTw_BY2YQ_BAQy5MFn-YtppMeQTr8t31Ck> <xme:RCGgX62tv-0LrAOggH4N1wKrgpbFOd_xR4blRzhqOKtG65WwzMXhF3bUn1ygHqXI5 TF-jJSYIVmLadt4bg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedruddtuddgjedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfrfgrthhrihgtkhcuofgvvhiivghkfdcuoehpmhesugho thgrnhgutghordgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugfffieehffejkeduhfdvke evffdufeeuieekheeuffejfeejieetieehudfgkeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt necurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpmhesughothgrnhgutghordgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:RCGgX9q4gom9_So7XmSAcgkBnagPV2XxSBdSG3LqA_FfaJT8sY9BuA> <xmx:RCGgX_n8l7gNEDk2eTTuWqEc_TRudMGZUEZbIwBkip14pb41l9zjnQ> <xmx:RCGgX10wzoXIuPLnPM9XrGTbFdCoVhd-EM5R81L8iHypob_SQ5wHGg> <xmx:RSGgX2Dp4xK8N96QB-gyrYV3aPlwMazXxi20-hBc-ZV32jGiMuuJAw>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9A20D668007A; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 10:09:56 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-530-g8da6958-fm-20201021.003-g69105b13-v35
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <17c9b352-808e-440c-8a38-4c485d73db5e@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <950b3464-2a19-a959-b4f7-0652c2bfa58b@knipp.de>
References: <04DF4069-4B02-489C-BB6E-94DEB581F862@elistx.com> <27FB25BD-4DBC-4EA6-9DF1-1B7A92E77BB1@elistx.com> <ad955cf5-d963-5560-7616-4680c9b41a04@knipp.de> <EE0BE74D-4BBB-4C34-9EFF-E10DD21CAE2F@verisign.com> <950b3464-2a19-a959-b4f7-0652c2bfa58b@knipp.de>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 10:09:34 -0500
From: Patrick Mevzek <pm@dotandco.com>
To: regext@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/kRfdGRp1ApPUZtn6c_9BPuTd_GE>
Subject: Re: [regext] WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-03
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: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 15:10:05 -0000

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020, at 10:55, Thomas Corte wrote:
> If a registry really wants registrars to understand and process their
> custom poll messages, it can still resort to simply reject the <login>
> command if it doesn't contain the namespace in question.

That would certainly have my preference and it has one big bonus attached to it:
no need of any change in the protocol, no need of any new extension/namespace,
no need of any new specification.

Sometimes the best solutions are not the technical ones.

And it is not so much a stretch: many, but not all, registries mandate a
"technical accreditation" at the beginning of the relationship with a given registrar.
Adding a requirement there to support some namespaces is not a big change
(a registrar is free of course to signal it during login and then just ignore
those messages if he wants to ignore them, but then the responsibility clearly
falls on his end and he is in control of his fate because he signaled the namespaces
at login, without the registry forcing delivery to it of messages with "dubious"
validity per RFC 5730).

-- 
  Patrick Mevzek
  pm@dotandco.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email