Hi Linlin,
Other RFC’s do not specify the error codes in particular cases (e.g. 5731 does
not specify what to return if you remove a linked contact does not exist). But…
on the other hand, I think it can be very useful if all Registries use the same
error codes for the same use cases.
It’s
Dear Pieter,
Maybe we defined a "role" element for the organizations. I think some of the
error cases are referenced with "role" but not with the organization IDs in
command. So this is something that is different from RFC5731. From my
understanding of AD's comments, this role may lead to some
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Registration Protocols Extensions WG of the
IETF.
Title : Registry Maintenance Notifications for the Extensible
Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
Authors
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
