IETF Logo Mail Archive

[rpp] Re: RPP -05 feedback

Stéphane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Wed, 18 March 2026 14:04 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@ietf.bortzmeyer.fr>
X-Original-To: rpp@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: rpp@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98820CD12403 for <rpp@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SL1k6q4L9PIf for <rpp@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FA16CD123AD for <rpp@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:04:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 8235BA0552; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 15:04:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by sbo-Latitude-7480 (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 902E519600AF; Wed, 18 Mar 2026 22:03:51 +0800 (HKT)
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 22:03:51 +0800
From: Stéphane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Jasdip Singh <jasdips@arin.net>
Message-ID: <abqwx-eq-_fEB4L2@ietf.bortzmeyer.fr>
References: <PH7PR15MB6084DB24C0D4AC84D9B899EEC941A@PH7PR15MB6084.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <PH7PR15MB6084DB24C0D4AC84D9B899EEC941A@PH7PR15MB6084.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID-Hash: 5RITXQFLN5UO3F5Y5DAZYI2HIDOJKI3Q
X-Message-ID-Hash: 5RITXQFLN5UO3F5Y5DAZYI2HIDOJKI3Q
X-MailFrom: bortzmeyer@ietf.bortzmeyer.fr
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "rpp@ietf.org" <rpp@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [rpp] Re: RPP -05 feedback
List-Id: "This list discusses a provisioning protocol based on RESTful principles and corresponding data representations using JSON." <rpp.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rpp/oPmJCG20iw3AKBLEJB4CUJnYK3U>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rpp>
List-Help: <mailto:rpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:rpp-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:rpp@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:rpp-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rpp-leave@ietf.org>

On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 04:01:20AM +0000, Jasdip Singh wrote:

> Bootstrapping:
> 
> Wonder if it’d be better to use modern SVCB/HTTPS RRs, instead of SRV RRs, for an HTTP-based protocol like RPP?

Speaking of this, I suggested instead to drop bootstrapping
completely. RPP is quite different from RDAP in that respect: there
are few clients and the registry know them all, it has a business
relationship with them, it can easily send them the URL of the RPP
server when onboarding registrars.

> Re: the word “types”. Beyond “application/rpp+json” what other media
> types do we envision for RPP? “application/rpp+cbor”, etc.?

Or XML :-) Nothin has been done yet but I suggest that the probability
that RPP use someday something else than JSON is low and remote so we
should not go further than "future media types may be used in the
future".

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status