Andy & Tom,
Thank you for posting draft-newton-regext-rdap-simple-contact. I prefer having
a simple contact extension that meets the minimal needs for DNRs, by being
capable of representing contact EPP RFC 5733 data, and the minimum needs for
INRs. Below is my initial set of feedback from the perspective of a DNR:
1. The extension needs to be further simplified with the following:
* Removing the “masked” member since it duplicates the purpose of the
redaction extension and introduces a bad practice of adding placeholder text.
* Remove the “parts” members from “individualName” and
“organizationNames”. The “parts” would not be used for DNRs, since they are
not separate elements in EPP RFC 5733.
* Use the RDAP JSON Values “role” type values for the supported set of
roles in place of the Role Names member. Simply provide a list of role values
using the registered values in the RDAP JSON Values IANA Registry.
* Consider specifying the “lang” member only for the “postalAddresses”
member, which would only apply with using the “loc” type in EPP RFC 5733.
* Remove the “Web Contacts” and “Geographic Locations” members unless
they are needed for INRs.
2. To meet the needs of representing EPP RFC 5733 data, the following needs
to be done:
* The “postalAddresses” need something to match the “postalInfo” type
attribute with the values of “loc” and “int”
Thanks,
--
JG
[cid87442*[email protected]]
James Gould
Fellow 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/>
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
