> Em 7 de dez de 2016, à(s) 15:04:000, Andrew Sullivan > <a...@anvilwalrusden.com> escreveu: > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 03:30:24PM +0000, Gould, James wrote: >> It sounds like you’re attempting to morph RDDS into the SRS. > > Nope. > >> RDDS is a lookup service and the SRS is an OLTP system. A lookup >> service either has the data or it doesn’t. Extra business logic >> associated with availability (variant blocking, relationship >> blocking, reserved domains, etc.) should be left to the appropriate >> channel which is the SRS and not RDDS. > > Also nope. The idea that the Registration Data Directory Service > doesn't have knowledge about the Registration Data such that the > repository policies are a secret from the RDDS strikes me as at least > unintuitive.
Unintuitive as it is, that was exactly the output of the ICANN EWG on RDDS... if Registration Data is stored at a central location as was part of that proposal, RDDS and SRS will be much further apart than it is today. > Moreover, since one RDDS service (whois) already > actually has mechanisms for communicating such information today at > least in some implementations, we have running code that we need to > conform to. We can do that using a local WHOIS port-43 attender that uses properly done availability checks using whatever protocol we get consensus on. Note that large registrars already do that, having a local WHOIS-like server that knows who to query next and to not query availability for domains already present at TLD zone files. Rubens _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
