Andy, I recommend that you formally define what is a breaking change in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions. I see the reference to the term with some examples, but no formal definition. I believe the versioning should be covered in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-versioning and not in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions, since they have conflicting goals and approaches. The sub-sections of 5.4 in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions should be handled in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-versioning, since that's where we should be discussing how to handle versioning. Are you interested in helping with this?
The versioning should address changes to the extension interface and not only when the interface includes a breaking change. A client should be able to know the full set of extension interfaces supported by the server. One option for introducing a new version of an RDAP extension is for the server to implement a default version with the option for the client to specify a different supported version. This is the approach taken in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-versioning that includes the timing of extension versioning support in the /help response for discovery. We can leverage the convention that has been used successfully in EPP for RDAP and formally define the convention in an RDAP extension. Thanks, -- JG 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/> On 6/10/26, 8:22 AM, "Andy Newton" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 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. On 09-06-2026 7:46 PM, Gould, James wrote: > The reference that you make for breaking changes in > draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions provides a few examples but is focused on > how to deal with breaking changes instead of defining what is considered a > breaking change. It does both. > Point versioning is not something new for this working group, since we've > been using point versioning of the XML URIs in the EPP extensions for a while > now for the same purpose. It's also not baked into EPP either. It's just a convention. XML and schema namespace URIs are opaque. -andy _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
