[regext] Protocol Action: 'Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Object Tagging' to Best Current Practice (draft-ietf-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt)

[The IESG]

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Object Tagging'
  (draft-ietf-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt) as Best Current Practice

This document is the product of the Registration Protocols Extensions Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Adam Roach, Alexey Melnikov and Ben Campbell.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-object-tag/





Technical Summary

  This document updates RFC 7484 by describing an operational practice 
  that can be used to add structure to RDAP identifiers that makes it 
  possible to identify the authoritative server for additional RDAP queries.

Working Group Summary

  draft-ietf-regext-rdap-object-tag is on best current practice track.  
  The document defines an entity identifier structure in RFC 7484 to 
  support identifying the authoritative server for additional RDAP queries.

Document Quality

  This document has been discussed on the mailing lists of the regext 
  working group.  The authors have addressed all comments and 
  changes have been incorporated in the document.  

  Verisign Labs and OpenRDAP have working implementations of this
  specification.

Personnel

  Document shepherd is James Gould, jgo...@verisign.com
  Area Director is Adam Roach, a...@nostrum.com

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] New Version Notification for draft-gould-carney-regext-registry-00.txt

[Pieter Vandepitte]

Did anyone consider RFC 6321 (xcal)? It has features like recurrences too. A 
maintenance event is basically just a calendar event + some data about the 
scope/context...

Kind regards

-- 
Pieter Vandepitte
Product Expert
+32 16 28 49 70
www.dnsbelgium.be 
 

 
 

On 10/08/18 00:08, "regext on behalf of Patrick Mevzek" 
 wrote:

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, at 15:48, Gould, James wrote:
> More specifically now, about "2.3.  Schedule" I am *strongly* 
> against using the format proposed for at least 2 reasons:
> - crontab format is not a standard, and is ambiguous for various 
> points
> - it encodes a format as a string which is itself in a formatted 
> structure since it is XML. "Hijacking" some free form space when you are 
> in formatted structure seems wrong to me and shows that the structure is 
> not correctly formatted because if it were you would not have to inject 
> a new format in a free text.
> 
> Why not use ISO8601 Repeated Time Interval format? We are then still 
> gulty of the previous point but at least it is a standard.
> Otherwise please amend the XML structure to break the content 
> currently in the crontab format.

Another way of encoding that, without judging myself if it is 
good/bad/better or worse than others but just to open horizons and see what is 
out there since I just stumbled upon it for unrelated reasons, is the systemd 
way, as described on 
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.time.html

With this example:

Thu,Fri 2012-*-1,5 11:12:13

The above refers to 11:12:13 of the first or fifth day of any month of the 
year 2012, but only if that day is a Thursday or Friday.

HTH,

-- 
  Patrick Mevzek
  p...@dotandco.com

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext


___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext