Re: [regext] draft-brown-epp-fees: in ?

2016-06-06 Thread Patrick Mevzek
isign_epp-extension_balance_v00.html Why not keep the 2 aspects (fee & balance) separated ? Since there are registries not using a prepayment model, hence where the balance has no meaning, but the fee part is useful. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext

[regext] Comment on draft-brown-epp-fees-07 regarding update

2016-06-22 Thread Patrick Mevzek
, and not the update command) -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

[regext] Comments on draft-lozano-ietf-eppext-registrar-expiration-date-01

2016-06-21 Thread Patrick Mevzek
he text in §2.1 does not explain what the server could/should reply, as it is written only from the registrar perspective. Could you elaborate which specific cases the server might use? - there are no examples of the third case of §2.1, that is flag=0 + no exDate node. Could you add one? HTH,

[regext] Reviews, reviews, reviews

2016-07-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
to implement it. So, just a thought if it can help, complementary to all other initiatives that may foster participation. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

[regext] Comment on draft-brown-epp-fees-07 regarding default domain:period in domain:check reply

2016-07-05 Thread Patrick Mevzek
istries should reply with its default value (the same one that will be used during a domain:create or other commands without a domain:period), which can be any number based on local policies (and may be different depending on the commands, it can be 2 years for create, but 1 for transfers) ?

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-01.txt

2017-04-03 Thread Patrick Mevzek
in object. A server MAY define a default initial registration period if not specified by the client. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Contact Postal Info Elements Proposal

2017-04-03 Thread Patrick Mevzek
uld suggest to add some wording about the contact:street nodes, especially if their number changes with the update done. It would probably be superfluous but I believe in this case it is better to over specify things instead of under-specify since this contact:update issue is qu

Re: [regext] Clarify on RFC 5731

2017-04-03 Thread Patrick Mevzek
authInfo, but a domain:info will always show me: hashed While I can understand the intent, I still believe it is not true to EPP spirit and design. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Working group action required on draft-ietf-regext-reseller-ext-01.txt

2017-04-03 Thread Patrick Mevzek
o identify resellers for a > domain. +1 for me for all the reasons Antoin, Scott and Alex have already said. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery

2017-08-03 Thread Patrick Mevzek
I totally agree with James on the Registry Mapping extension, that could be suited for this task. I would even be very happy if VeriSign could push forward to make this EPP extension a standard, to be used by many registries. -- Patrick Mevzek __

Re: [regext] News of draft-ellacott-historical-rdap?

2017-11-28 Thread Patrick Mevzek
formation would go against a lot of laws, especially now in Europe. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] REGEXT Fee Document

2017-11-21 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ck to one, which may appeal to some and not to others, instead of trying to accomodate too many disparate or even opposite goals. > If you have another proposal to address this use case, please share it. My proposal is to keep things as is, with the class at the object level. --

Re: [regext] Request for Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-regext-change-poll

2017-11-22 Thread Patrick Mevzek
istry, like technical ones related to resolution - for contacts being automatically purged by a registry after some time of non-use - etc. Implementation status: you can add Net::DRI as a client if you like, it implements all the draft. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt

2017-12-13 Thread Patrick Mevzek
are not into some kind of structured format like JSON. Where on the opposite, inside RDAP we have the luxury of the JSON structure. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt

2017-12-12 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ust wanted to voice my concerns. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Call for adoption: draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag

2017-12-19 Thread Patrick Mevzek
clearly material to discuss inside this working group, so I favor adoption of this document. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Request for Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token

2017-12-19 Thread Patrick Mevzek
e work on Net::DRI, and we can certainly add > Net::DRI to the Implementation Status section. Can you provide the > following key values to add to the draft or you can also submit a pull > request to the EPP-Allocation-Token-Specification GitHub project > (https://github.com/james-f-gould/EPP-Allocation-Token-Specification.git) > if you want to define it yourself? Ok, I will follow on that separately, thanks. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt

2017-12-19 Thread Patrick Mevzek
showing that changes like IDNs to a core protocol were not necessarily the best choice. See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-klensin-dns-function-considerations/ (a very interesting read for history decisions) -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-dnsoperator-to-rrr-protocol-03.txt

2017-12-19 Thread Patrick Mevzek
> Working group - are there any other comments or review of this document. I am working on a review for this document. I hope to be able to send it tomorrow. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org ht

Re: [regext] REGEXT Fee Document

2017-11-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
fees in any case. The extension is here to be as specific as possible, this is cleatly not the good spot to try reducing the bytes count. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] REGEXT Fee Document

2017-11-13 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ed > at the domain object level and not the command level, so unless there > are arguments to keep it at the command level the next version will > move this to the object, , level. I also believe that we talk about a class for a domain and not a class for a command, so it should be t

Re: [regext] FW: I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt

2017-12-11 Thread Patrick Mevzek
e 2 solutions involve schema changes so are more difficult to put in place, but I see them are more future-proof. Sorry if I'm late to the game and I revisit already rehashed grounds. Regards, -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regex

Re: [regext] Interest in collaborating on an EPP over HTTP draft?

2018-05-22 Thread Patrick Mevzek
nstead of forcing retro-compatibilies, except if good reasons for that of course, this is what I am curious about. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-05-23 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ies implemented in the wild by registries and registrars to develop > the appropriate interpretation of the RFC. Which is absolutely not what I said. So I will stop here, as I may be doing more harm than benefits to the WG by continuing. Regards, --

Re: [regext] Interest in collaborating on an EPP over HTTP draft?

2018-05-23 Thread Patrick Mevzek
u need to use HTTP/1 with it and not the newer HTTP/2. And at least in the gTLD world, things could probably not implemented before existing as an RFC. And some gTLDs are very small. This is not technical related but may need to be taken into account if you wish for large adoption. -- Patrick Mevz

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-23 Thread Patrick Mevzek
n pace. > I guess it's the fact > that roles are defined as properties of the organization and at the same > time as properties of the link? Yes, that is one troublesome point I raised months ago. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mail

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-23 Thread Patrick Mevzek
done should be done. This is the main point I will try to address in a separate email since it is a generic issue, not specifically related to this proposal. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Object template extension

2018-05-25 Thread Patrick Mevzek
he latest iteration around these concepts was this draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gould-regext-dataset-01 HTH, -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-24 Thread Patrick Mevzek
down your concerns > and it's up to others to decide whether the Draft can become a Proposed > Standard It is past LC like the chairs said, so the ship has sailed. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
services up to a separate draft. I completely agree with this split. The problem that was discussed after this draft has in fact nothing to do in its core with poll messages, the issue, if there is one, is more global than that. I will try to expose it in another email. -- Pa

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
efore doing this step? See also my email just before about the IETF 101 minutes for the same problem. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-brown-whoami-00.txt

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
it should do or not, and hence its possible limitations. I believe that you will need to clearly specify the intent and the goal you want to reach with this, before the document could be reviewed and go forward. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailin

[regext] IETF 101 minutes, and discussions not happening on this mailing-list

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ng to improve the end results of our work. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
I am not sure its current version correspond really to the working group consensus. The above applies the same way for the two "organization" documents. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
as the idea was already suggested (changing the pure textual message by adding some formatting in it). Hence I would really not think that using a CDATA block is a good idea. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-05-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
hile removing the X part, loosing it forever? Etc. No great solution either here. This needs to be documented before any attempt to solve (and again I do not believe it will be possible to find a solution that fits all cases, at best a guidance document clearly describing things, and suggesting things ma

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-05-22 Thread Patrick Mevzek
able conclusion is not really trying to discuss or come into agreement or consensus in my mind. But again, I think we rehashed this point often enough now, so besides some specific document to discuss, or other new views to exchange, it may be better to let the thread die. -- Patrick Mevzek

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-11 Thread Patrick Mevzek
eline > for password length policies can be found in [reference > here]”. A minimum length of 1 would ensure that the field can’t be > blank, and the server can check if whatever is provided lines up with > expectations for clients. That sound perfect to me. Thanks Scott fo

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-13 Thread Patrick Mevzek
fully (that is enforcing something higher than 6, and not lower, if they do define the space of characters allowed too). -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-13 Thread Patrick Mevzek
by Pieter also I think) would be now a good time to think about, and if we go towards some "extensibility" in authentication frameworks, why not just build on existing RFCs? -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Proposed Revision to our Charter

2018-06-08 Thread Patrick Mevzek
and RDAP are detailed before in many sentences. So, in short, I am uneasy to say anything because I lack both context and substance about what we are talking about. Some examples of relevant work could also be useful. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailin

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

2018-06-09 Thread Patrick Mevzek
rames per the schemas. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-09 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ded features also. I note in passing that there was always a way to extend authorization mechanisms in EPP, for the domain:auth element. I have never seen however any extension proposing there anything different. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing lis

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

2018-06-09 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ut registry and registrar. I would favor changing the name of the extension and removing Registry from it. I lack good suggestions for now, maybe later. Policy Mapping? Metadata? Zone Metadata? -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-28 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Mon, May 28, 2018, at 21:29, Antoin Verschuren wrote: > Op 27 mei 2018, om 21:23 heeft Patrick Mevzek het > volgende geschreven: > > > This is covered I think in ICANN world by section 1.4.2 of the whois > > specification: > > > > "Additional

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-28 Thread Patrick Mevzek
Antoin, On Mon, May 28, 2018, at 22:40, Patrick Mevzek wrote: > > > On Mon, May 28, 2018, at 21:29, Antoin Verschuren wrote: > > Op 27 mei 2018, om 21:23 heeft Patrick Mevzek het > > volgende geschreven: > > > > > This is covered I think in ICANN

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-30 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ndardize this extension that so many actors want or agree to. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Interest in collaborating on an EPP over HTTP draft?

2018-05-29 Thread Patrick Mevzek
nsport having those properties. Both "parts" should be able to evolve/be swapped independently as long as the contract (the common set of properties agreed upon) remains valid. As for EPP, each new transport should have a specification like it is done in RFC 5734 for TLS. --

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-04 Thread Patrick Mevzek
it as those are specific characters in an XML streams). I know that RFC5730 does the same thing, but it was written before PRECIS. So now I think we should instead build on it. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-05 Thread Patrick Mevzek
p://www.verisign.com/epp/authSession-1.0 but it was more for domain:update operations. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting

2018-06-05 Thread Patrick Mevzek
unt multiple ways to implement things (and especially doing validation or not). -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-06-06 Thread Patrick Mevzek
t core EPP and hence we should defer to other RFCs dealing with passwords for recommendations instead of trying to invent new ones. This has nothing to do with the XML schema type. And I am still not convinced that whitespaces are a problem here (again, because the password is entered by a progra

Re: [regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-dnsoperator-to-rrr-protocol-04

2018-05-27 Thread Patrick Mevzek
itored by a parental agent and acted on depending on local policy. It specifically excludes CDS/CDNSKEY handling of course (section 5) but it is a generic signalling protocol. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/m

Re: [regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-dnsoperator-to-rrr-protocol-04

2018-05-27 Thread Patrick Mevzek
rry more detail than that. I think this kind of explain many problems: it is not enough of a simple signaling protocol, but too much of something more complicated with authentication built in. I would think this is the core point to address: if DNSSEC related authentication is enough, then make

Re: [regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-dnsoperator-to-rrr-protocol-04

2018-05-27 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018, at 21:02, Matthew Pounsett wrote: > On 7 January 2018 at 18:28, Patrick Mevzek <p...@dotandco.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017, at 07:03, Patrick Mevzek wrote: > > > Hello authors, > > > > > > Pleas

Re: [regext] WGLC: draft-ietf-regext-org-02

2018-05-27 Thread Patrick Mevzek
heir support for this extension as it would help them for their various business needs. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Host update and removing V6 glues aka comparison normalized and compressed representation

2018-04-26 Thread Patrick Mevzek
whatever it chooses to use, before applying any other kind of business rule, such as accepting or refusing the command. > IP addresses are anonymized. Next time, for obfuscation, use guidance from RFC 3849. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com __

[regext] Regain of interest in RDAP tiered access?

2018-04-26 Thread Patrick Mevzek
(expedited?) work to conduct in this working group to deliver solutions for proper RDAP layered access :-) And Scott's drafts and experiments are probably very good starting points. Let the festivities begin! -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext

Re: [regext] My review of draft-ietf-regext-org and draft-ietf-regext-org-ext

2017-12-30 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ain object. If it is the same value, then one of them is redundant and should be removed I think. I hope to understand this more in your later versions. Do not hesitate to add more text and examples. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] FW: I-D Action: draft-hollenbeck-regext-rdap-object-tag-05.txt

2017-12-30 Thread Patrick Mevzek
g. However I think the rough consensus on the issue is clear, so we will remain in a disagreement on this specific issue, but the draft would go along. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Request for Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-regext-change-poll

2018-01-04 Thread Patrick Mevzek
2.2? It seems to nicely explain things, so I am happy with it. Thanks for your changes and patience. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] My review of draft-ietf-regext-org and draft-ietf-regext-org-ext

2018-01-04 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ng that road there are many other issues, small by themselves but not negligible, that could be changed and enhanced in EPP. So, in short, while technically the simplest/fastest case, this is unlikely to happen. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing li

Re: [regext] EPP and DNAME records?

2018-01-06 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018, at 20:01, Patrick Mevzek wrote: > - I can not really imagine multiple versions of your extension in the > wild at the same time (James/you speak about -01 vs -02), do you have a > specific idea in mind? And even in that case the client would surely at login spe

Re: [regext] EPP and DNAME records?

2018-01-06 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ot specify anything in its domain:info command) HTH, -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

[regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-dnsoperator-to-rrr-protocol-04

2017-12-21 Thread Patrick Mevzek
a cronjob could have been left running at the old provider for example) * Similar cases if there is a transfer of the domain name... should the trust relationship be reset to its beginnings since in some of these cases this also has the consequence of changing the D

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Invite

2018-01-08 Thread Patrick Mevzek
se some help. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] REGEXT Interim Meeting Invite

2018-01-08 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ill probably not be able to take part of the meeting for technical reasons, but I hope that you would also take into account prior discussions by email on this topic. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] org extensions for transfer requirement

2018-01-07 Thread Patrick Mevzek
for this. So you are saying that the current EPP WhoisInfo extension designed to help registrars conduct transfers is not suited to do that? -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Review of draft-ietf-regext-dnsoperator-to-rrr-protocol-04

2018-01-07 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017, at 07:03, Patrick Mevzek wrote: > Hello authors, > > Please find below my review of your draft. Please also have a look at https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hildebrand-deth-00.txt as it covers related goals (it is more generic than just NS/DS needs) I do not k

Re: [regext] EPP and DNAME records?

2018-01-08 Thread Patrick Mevzek
thor, if you are behind the sentence you wrote, and if so if you can explain why it is mandatory. Because I do not understand it. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] EPP and DNAME records?

2018-01-14 Thread Patrick Mevzek
s it might be more productive to consider how > to invent a policy to allow a DNAME-only TLD if you're not a ccTLD. But this won't be ontopic in this WG. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] [art] New Version Notification for draft-hardie-iris-arpa-00.txt

2018-01-25 Thread Patrick Mevzek
utdown-of-domain-check-dchk-lookup-service-as-of-3-december-2013/ .FR still runs it (without any plan to stop it for what I am aware) I am not aware of any other domain registries deployment. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org

[regext] Comments on "draft-sattler-epp-registry-maintenance-02"

2018-01-30 Thread Patrick Mevzek
e notifications? If so, where? (because registrars may not poll on OT systems so it may make sense to publish OT maintenances even on the production EPP server). -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-rdap-object-tag-00.txt

2018-02-12 Thread Patrick Mevzek
not happy to have that set as a new standard/recommendation. (and even less by the ~ character choice, but this is bikeshedding deriving from what I think is the core problem: putting structure inside a non structured element while all the surroundings being JSON is structured). -- Patrick M

Re: [regext] Request for Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token

2018-01-01 Thread Patrick Mevzek
lly) I am saying that the example is not clear, as it is using something not even discussed in your document, without explanations. But if it is clear for everyone else, then it is ok. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list reg

[regext] My review of draft-ietf-regext-org and draft-ietf-regext-org-ext

2017-12-26 Thread Patrick Mevzek
Y uses it for domains it manages. === comments related to both === I am more than a little fuzy about your "role" uses. When you create an organization you specify a role, and then when you create/update a domain to add an organization you again specifcy a role. Are they the same or different? Why do they need to be repeated? This whole idea of "role" will need to be seriously improved in both documents. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] org extensions for transfer requirement

2017-12-27 Thread Patrick Mevzek
;org" extension not to be a good fit for that endeavour, and I advise not modifying it in that direction. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-brown-whoami-00.txt

2017-12-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ply for the website under this domain. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Request for Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-regext-change-poll

2018-01-03 Thread Patrick Mevzek
I think we will agree to remain in disagreement on the subject itself, as you put the protocol over the semantics and I do the opposite. However putting more text and explanations as you suggest would certainly help implementers to better understand things, so this will be welcome I am sure. -

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => Structure

2018-07-25 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018, at 09:33, Patrick Mevzek wrote: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gould-carney-regext-registry I have hinted in the past that I believe another structure for the XML piece of data about zone policies could provide more benefits, such as: - by not hav

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

2018-08-09 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ystemd.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 ___ re

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => RFC5730

2018-07-20 Thread Patrick Mevzek
n I guess :-)) Not all registries accept all of these values (again you can argue they are not following the standard, I am not judging that in one way or another just letting people know what exists really today), so you might want to track that in the regist

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-07-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
I said, this problem exists since EPP started so it is not new, and it seems the current status quo fits most of the player (due to the number of people having participated here), so we are maybe devoting resources to trying to design something perfect... that noone will then u

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

2018-07-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
on information. And associated schema: >From my notes, and except if it changed recently, .NO uses this feature. Related to passwords, I think there is nothing about the EPP one (client login). But you have things like that: - some registries mandate it to be changed on first login - some registries mandate it to be changed at least in some frequence (ex: each 183 days). -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

[regext] Suggestion of work methodology?

2018-07-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ed to implement the extension, it should be good if they speak up. It could help reshape the design to make sure it accomodate more cases. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-07-15 Thread Patrick Mevzek
ovided element... the message you describe is in the response of a poll command by a client, and this poll command has none of that data you put in the element of the server reply. So while I see the underlying idea, I think you are bending RFC5730 quite a lot to achieve it. -- Patrick Mevzek p

Re: [regext] FW: New Version Notification for draft-gould-regext-login-security-00.txt

2018-07-15 Thread Patrick Mevzek
sides would not be able to gain any knowledge of the password used. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Interest in collaborating on an EPP over HTTP draft?

2018-07-15 Thread Patrick Mevzek
o they needed a proxy from TCP/700 and TCP/43 (but the whois problem is kind of solved if you switch to RDAP) - the .BE registry "recently" migrated all their systems in the cloud too (AWS) so there is at least this solution that works. See https://www.dnsbelgium.be/en/news/first-euro

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-07-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
es, because I think the problem is global and we should tackle it globally (or not at all and leave it at the current status quo). -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

[regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension

2018-07-17 Thread Patrick Mevzek
, and not "custom". So custom should be dropped from core document. Same for privacy/proxy these concepts are not in RFC5733, and should be handled in extensions. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailma

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => RFC5730

2018-07-17 Thread Patrick Mevzek
s is hard to express in a regex as the position does not matter. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => HOST

2018-07-17 Thread Patrick Mevzek
can not be updated if it would then become a glue without any IP or become an external host with an IP. -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => CONTACT

2018-07-17 Thread Patrick Mevzek
pported by some registries, like contact:id Should that be handled or left to an extension? -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => IPR

2018-07-17 Thread Patrick Mevzek
g what can be done to make that going smoothly? -- Patrick Mevzek ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] Tidbits after monday meeting, related to registry mapping extension => DOMAIN

2018-07-17 Thread Patrick Mevzek
algorithm. While indeed protocol 3 is the only value possible, the secDNS extension could allow other value for flags even if 257 is the only one making sense, and the only one used in examples. Should we care to codify these limits? Things may be different with CDS/CDSNKEY, I am not sure. -- Patr

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-07-15 Thread Patrick Mevzek
is not the case in these examples. This latest idea from Martin and you is probably the best one we discussed about as of yet, and if I could get convinced to add myself on the consensus for it, I am still uneasy by how it uses RFC5730 structures. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotandco.com ___

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-07-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
> extensions. This is indeed more pragmatic. But all this mechanism to define which messages to accept will be outside the EPP protocol and this WG. > I will participate this afternoon remotely. See you soon. I will try to listen too, or be on Jabber. -- Patrick Mevzek p...@dotand

Re: [regext] Poll messages with unhandled namespaces (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07.txt)

2018-07-16 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018, at 17:41, Patrick Mevzek wrote: > This is indeed more pragmatic. But all this mechanism to define which > messages to accept > will be outside the EPP protocol and this WG. But please also remember that if we want to tackle this problem in a generic way (and al

Re: [regext] WGLC redux: REGEXT working group charter

2018-08-31 Thread Patrick Mevzek
;Data formats for files" (which files? what data? why the format needs a specification and a working group?). "Registry mapping" and "Registry transition" will probably seem obscure to anyone outside of the working group. I am myself not even sure what it

Re: [regext] EPP and DNAME records?

2018-01-13 Thread Patrick Mevzek
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018, at 14:51, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 08:01:02PM +0100, > Patrick Mevzek <p...@dotandco.com> wrote > a message of 77 lines which said: > > > as soon as we add one RR through EPP, as James stated there is the > > quest

  1   2   >