Hi Jasdip,
IMO, REPP is not an "EPP extension" as defined by RFC5730. It provides
neither just a switch of transport (like EoH and EoQ) nor an extension
to EPP comands and responses.
Instead, it presents a full revision of EPP that maps some EPP features
onto HTTP features.
Moreover, the current proposal is incompatible with some existing or
future documents including extensions to EPP query commands (see Jody's
question at last meeting about REPP compatibility with the Fee Extension).
On the contrary, in the spirit of achieving a full compliance with
RFC5730, .it is going to update its EPP implementation that has been
working since 2009.
With regard to a possible RegExt rechartering, I also don't think we
need it.
RFC5730 already allows for implementing EPP over multiple transports.
But it does even more, it makes some examples of possible alternatives
to TCP.
Therefore, leaving aside for the moment the debate about considering a
new transport as an extension or not, it would be paradoxical if the
protocol itself admitted other transports than TCP but it wouldn't be
allowed to standardize them just like it has been done for TCP :-(
Best,
Mario
Il 22/03/2024 01:12, Jasdip Singh ha scritto:
Hi.
Curious if the newly proposed “RESTful EPP” is considered a new
protocol that is different from EPP, or is it an “extension” of EPP?
(AFAICT, the former seems outside the current regext charter.)
Thanks,
Jasdip
*From: *regext <[email protected]> on behalf of Hollenbeck,
Scott <[email protected]>
*Date: *Friday, March 22, 2024 at 9:56 AM
*To: *[email protected]
<[email protected]>,
[email protected]
<[email protected]>, [email protected]
<[email protected]>
*Subject: *Re: [regext] EPP evolution and the REGEXT charter
*From:*regext <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Gould, James
*Sent:* Thursday, March 21, 2024 7:49 PM
*To:* [email protected]; [email protected]
*Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] EPP evolution and the REGEXT charter
*Caution:*This email originated from outside the organization. Do not
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
Maarten,
The charter refers to EPP extensions, which transports is a form of an
EPP extension. RFC 5730 defines the extension points for EPP and
includes support for extending the transports based on Section 2.1
“Transport Mapping Considerations”. I don’t believe that there is a
need to revise the REGEXT charter to support the additional of new EPP
transports.
*/[SAH] Agreed. New transport mappings are just another type of
extension as long as they preserve the data model described in RFC 5730./*
*//*
*/Scott/*
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
--
Dott. Mario Loffredo
Senior Technologist
Technological Unit “Digital Innovation”
Institute of Informatics and Telematics (IIT)
National Research Council (CNR)
via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy
Phone: +39.0503153497
Web:http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
