I'm am a co-author on this draft, but I did a re-read and I have the following
items that need to be addressed:
1. In section 4.1.2 “EPP <info> Command”
* I recommend changing “based on its server policy” to “based on server
policy”.
* I recommend changing the sentence ‘An attribute “role” associated with
<orgext:id> is used…’ to ‘The “role” attribute is used to represent the
relationship that the organization has to the object’.
* Change “One or more <orgext:id> elements…” to “Zero or more
<orgext:id> element…”, since the XML schema supports zero organizations and
there is an example without zero organizations.
* The info command example can be removed since it is not applicable.
2. In section 4.2.1 “EPP <create> Command”
* The <orgext:create> element supports a list of <orgext:id> elements
and not just one. My recommendation is to modify the description of the
<orgext:id> element to be:
i. “One or
more <orgext:id> elements that contain the identifier of the organization.”
* I recommend changing the sentence ‘An attribute “role” associated with
<orgext:id> is used…’ to ‘The “role” attribute is used to represent the
relationship that the organization has to the object’.
* I recommend removing the roid attribute from the <domain:pw> element
of the <create> examples.
1. In section 4.2.5 “EPP <update> Command”
* Modify “…modify the attributes of a domain object” to “…modify the
attribute of an object”, “In addition to the EPP command elements described in
the EPP domain object,...” to “In addition to the EPP <update> command
elements, …”, and “wants to update the domain object” to “wants to update the
object” to be object agnostic.
* Modify “The <orgext:add>, <orgext:rem>, and <orgext:rem> elements…” to
““The <orgext:add>, <orgext:rem>, and <orgext:chg> elements…”.
* The <orgext:add>, <orgext:rem>, and <orgext:chg> elements support a
list of <orgext:id> elements and not just one. My recommendation is to modify
the description of the <orgext:id> element to be:
i. “One or
more <orgext:id> elements that contain the identifier of the organization.”
* Shouldn’t the “addRemChgType” in the XML schema remove the
minOccurs=”0”, since I believe that if the <orgext:add>, <orgext:rem>, or
<orgext:chg> element is provided that it should contain at least one
organization?
* I recommend changing the sentence ‘An attribute “role” associated with
<orgext:id> is used…’ to ‘The “role” attribute is used to represent the
relationship that the organization has to the object’.
* I would remove the “domain with no organization” example since it
looks like a duplicate of the “adding multiple organizations” example, and I
don’t believe it is applicable.
—
JG
James Gould
Distinguished Engineer
jgo...@verisign.com
703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/>
On 4/20/18, 9:36 AM, "regext on behalf of James Galvin"
<regext-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of gal...@elistx.com> wrote:
This is a reminder that this document is in working group last call.
Please indicate your support for the publication of this document.
If any working group member objects to the publication of this document
please respond on the list by close of business everywhere, Friday, 27
April 2018. If there are no objections the document will be submitted
to the IESG.
During the last call the chairs are looking for a document shepherd for
this document. If you are interested in being the document shepherd
please let the chairs know. The document editors cannot be the document
shepherd.
Thanks,
Jim
On 13 Apr 2018, at 9:21, James Galvin wrote:
> The document editors have indicated that the following document is
> ready for submission to the IESG to be considered for publication as a
> Proposed Standard:
>
> Organization Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-org-ext/
>
> Please indicate your support for the publication of this document.
>
> If any working group member objects to the publication of this
> document please respond on the list by close of business everywhere,
> Friday, 27 April 2018. If there are no objections the document will
> be submitted to the IESG.
>
> During the last call the chairs are looking for a document shepherd
> for this document. If you are interested in being the document
> shepherd please let the chairs know. The document editors cannot be
> the document shepherd.
>
> If you’ve never been a document shepherd before don’t worry.
> It’s a great way to understand the IETF process and your chairs
> would be delighted to help you through it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoin and Jim
> WG Co-Chairs
_______________________________________________
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
