Hi all,
if I understood well the rdapConformance content in the help response
should be different from that included in the other responses. Right?
I misunderstood Scott's proposal as a mean by which a server could
inform a client about the supported features any time regardless the
Agree with Patrick's points about rdapConformance in the help response
informing about all capabilities and rdapConformance being more specific for a
particular query response.
Jasdip
On 7/31/20, 12:29 PM, "regext on behalf of Patrick Mevzek"
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020, at 11:21,
:49 AM
> >> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
> >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in
draft-ietf-regext-
> >> rdap-reverse-search
> >>
> >> Hi Scott,
> >>
>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020, at 11:21, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> Note "supported extensions". This is why I'm saying that we need to
> register all extensions with IANA
I agree.
> and include them in the
> rdapConformance data structure even if they don't describe a response
> extension.
I agree,
> -Original Message-
> From: regext On Behalf Of Patrick Mevzek
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 11:51 AM
> To: regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-
> rdap-reverse-search
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020, at 10:
o: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in
draft-ietf-regext-
>> rdap-reverse-search
>>
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> Il 31/07/2020 15:21, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto:
>>>>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020, at 10:35, Mario Loffredo wrote:
> The server might inlcude in rdapConformance either the hints to all the
> supported features or the only hints to the features allowed to the
> consumer.
>
> This also applies to the help response. Definitively, it's a matter of
> server
Hi Patrick,
Il 31/07/2020 16:33, Patrick Mevzek ha scritto:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020, at 08:02, Mario Loffredo wrote:
Furthermore, my opinion is that Section 4.1 of RFC7483bis should be
updated to treat this use case. I mean, a server should signal in
rdapConformance not only the extensions used
Hi George,
thanks for your feedback.
Il 31/07/2020 15:08, George Michaelson ha scritto:
My understanding of the sense of the room, is that it is beholden on
the numbers space to construct words for Security Considerations which
address the _problem statement_ inherent in privacy and security,
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:03 AM
>>>> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in
>>>> draft-ietf-regext- rdap-reverse-search
>>>>
>>>> Hi Scott,
>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020, at 08:02, Mario Loffredo wrote:
> Furthermore, my opinion is that Section 4.1 of RFC7483bis should be
> updated to treat this use case. I mean, a server should signal in
> rdapConformance not only the extensions used in building the response
> but all the supported
Il 31/07/2020 16:10, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto:
-Original Message-
From: Mario Loffredo
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:49 AM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-
rdap-reverse-search
Hi Scott,
Il 31/07
> -Original Message-
> From: Mario Loffredo
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:49 AM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-
> rdap-reverse-search
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Il 31/07/20
Hi Scott,
Il 31/07/2020 15:21, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto:
-Original Message-
From: Mario Loffredo
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:03 AM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-
rdap-reverse-search
Hi Scott
> -Original Message-
> From: Mario Loffredo
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:03 AM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott ; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext-
> rdap-reverse-search
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> thanks a lot for
My understanding of the sense of the room, is that it is beholden on
the numbers space to construct words for Security Considerations which
address the _problem statement_ inherent in privacy and security, Not
to specify fixes, but to document the issues and the sense Jim Reid
brought into the
Hi Scott,
thanks a lot for your feddback.
Please find my comments to your feedback below.
Il 31/07/2020 14:29, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto:
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search currently states that "This document has no
actions for IANA". I believe that's primarily because there's
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search currently states that "This document has
no actions for IANA". I believe that's primarily because there's nothing new
or different being returned in the search results, which is where RDAP servers
describe the features they support. There is, however, a
18 matches
Mail list logo
