That is one of my concerns, RDAP is a lookup protocol and not the SRS and should only return data that exists with no reasons why it does not exist other than scenarios like authorization issues or when data can be found elsewhere by reference. We have not defined the use cases and it should not be assumed that because RDAP provides registration data that it should also support availability logic like the SRS. Can we clearly define the use case of this undefined service? I view this as a separate service from the SRS and RDAP to meet the undefined needs of a yet to be defined set of users.
— JG [cid:image001.png@01D25797.0F30A490] James Gould Distinguished Engineer jgo...@verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://verisigninc.com/> From: regext <regext-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Francisco Obispo <fobi...@uniregistry.com> Date: Friday, December 16, 2016 at 11:54 AM To: Andrew Newton <a...@hxr.us> Cc: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext@ietf.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Using RDAP as a Domain Availability Service I don’t like having to implement an RDAP client that would have to send two queries. One to get the domain information, and if the resource does not exist, then another query to see if it’s available. Checking for a reason on why the domain name is not available could or could not be expensive, but this should not be a reason to disallow it at the ‘presentation’ layer of the protocol. In my opinion, we should have some OPTIONAL fields in the original negative response to signal whether the name is available or not, and if not, a way to provide a reason. If this is mandated or not by registry policy / contract, it should be a different issue. regards Francisco Obispo CTO - Registry Operations ____________________________ [niregistry]<http://www.uniregistry.com/> 2161 San Joaquin Hills Road Newport Beach, CA 92660 Office +1 949 706 2300 x4202 fobi...@uniregistry.link On 16 Dec 2016, at 3:34, Andrew Newton wrote: This topic keeps appearing over and over again, so Marcos and I decided to address it. As it turns out, there's not much needed to achieve this. This draft suggests two new query parameters and re-uses the current RDAP domain query. In other words, its a very small addition to RDAP. -andy A new version of I-D, draft-newton-regext-rdap-domain-availability-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Andrew Lee Newton and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-newton-regext-rdap-domain-availability Revision: 00 Title: Using RDAP as a Domain Availability Service Document date: 2016-12-16 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 6 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-newton-regext-rdap-domain-availability-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-newton-regext-rdap-domain-availability/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-newton-regext-rdap-domain-availability-00 Abstract: This document describes a minimal profile of RDAP which can be used to check the availability of domain names available for registration. _______________________________________________ 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
