IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [weirds] I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-dnrd-ap-query-00.txt

"John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Tue, 01 May 2012 02:43 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: weirds@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: weirds@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEC921E80BE for <weirds@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.405
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.405 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.794, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id szwJfLBzA1xw for <weirds@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D44A421E80BA for <weirds@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 19:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 70577 invoked from network); 1 May 2012 02:43:22 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 1 May 2012 02:43:22 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=4f9f4dc9.xn--btvx9d.k1204; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=9CUkABYUdpEDZRnS+wcS+UWiANW8zczmRX/zembnlh0=; b=cGTDIDCKOhGHVSxnDmMwP1LUUntQCkWtaF/gyAZSsShNjlysrEgnFtbdQLhiiUMUyJ2H47aTdyQpfXuM/ERQClsaDHs9CaKL+ljkHqjhYffjo0tuPyUKuaZDUcPagi5fq7QCSx2Nhx1kWYFAH2Je/djaWD5ZUp7n1lt7l1+qBFY=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 02:42:59 -0000
Message-ID: <20120501024259.96928.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: weirds@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <265BE093-6BD1-4A5B-AEBB-C36178A0A8CF@hxr.us>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [weirds] I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-dnrd-ap-query-00.txt
X-BeenThere: weirds@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "WHOIS-based Extensible Internet Registration Data Service \(WEIRDS\)" <weirds.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/weirds>, <mailto:weirds-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/weirds>
List-Post: <mailto:weirds@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:weirds-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds>, <mailto:weirds-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 02:43:25 -0000

>> I've received a private note from someone suggesting that queries for
>registrar objects by ID and hosts by IP address should be included in
>this draft. Does that sound reasonable?
>
>Is it something the general public would be interested in? Or is it
>something a domain industry person wants? If its the former, it is
>probably a good idea. If it is the latter, then why aren't they using
>EPP or whatever?

Hosts by IP address is definitely useful to the hoi polloi.

Objects by ID might be useful if there are responses to queries that
include IDs, and that's what you have to do to find out what the ID
means.

R's,
John

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status