Alissa,

Thank you for your review and comments.  I answer your question below.

-- 
 
JG



James Gould
Distinguished Engineer
[email protected] 
<applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/[email protected]>

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/>

On 1/21/20, 1:34 PM, "Alissa Cooper via Datatracker" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
    draft-ietf-regext-login-security-07: Discuss
    
    When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
    email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
    introductory paragraph, however.)
    
    
    Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
    for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
    
    
    The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-login-security/
    
    
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    DISCUSS:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Perhaps some simple questions (apologies if I'm missing something obvious):
    since there is no registry of custom events, how do developers of 
independent
    implementations know which custom events they should be aiming to support? 
And
    how do they understand the semantics associated with custom events beyond 
what
    the event names can convey?
    
JG - The custom security event is following an EPP extensibility pattern that 
has been used in prior EPP RFCs (e.g., Launch Phases in RFC 8334, Contact Types 
in RFC 8543, Operations in RFC 8590).  The definition of the custom events can 
take many forms, such as inclusion in a server policy document or use of an 
in-band policy query interface.  The EPP policy extension 
draft-gould-regext-login-security-policy is an example of an EPP query 
interface for draft-ietf-regext-login-security. 
 
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    COMMENT:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    = Section 5 =
    
    "One schema is presented here that is the EPP Login Security Extension
       schema."
    
    This phrasing seems a little odd (is there more than one schema?). I would
    suggest "The EPP Login Security Extension schema is presented here."
    
   JG - I like your suggested phrase better.  I'll make that change.  
    

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Reply via email to