> -----Original Message----- > From: Mario Loffredo <mario.loffr...@iit.cnr.it> > Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:49 AM > To: Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenb...@verisign.com>; regext@ietf.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in draft-ietf-regext- > rdap-reverse-search > > Hi Scott, > > Il 31/07/2020 15:21, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Mario Loffredo <mario.loffr...@iit.cnr.it> > >> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 9:03 AM > >> To: Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenb...@verisign.com>; regext@ietf.org > >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] IANA Considerations in > >> draft-ietf-regext- rdap-reverse-search > >> > >> Hi Scott, > >> > >> thanks a lot for your feddback. > >> > >> Please find my comments to your feedback below. > >> > >> Il 31/07/2020 14:29, Hollenbeck, Scott ha scritto: > >>> draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search currently states that "This > >>> document > >> has no actions for IANA". I believe that's primarily because there's > >> nothing new or different being returned in the search results, which > >> is where RDAP servers describe the features they support. > >> Exactly. > >>> There is, however, a case to be made for registering a value in the > >>> RDAP > >> extensions registry: a response to a help query (or any other query) > >> can be used to indicate that the server supports reverse search. I'd > >> like to suggest this change for Section 7: > >>> OLD: > >>> This document has no actions for IANA. > >>> > >>> NEW: > >>> IANA is requested to register the following value in the RDAP > >>> Extensions > >> Registry: > >>> Extension identifier: reverse_search_1_0 (or whatever makes sense) > >>> Registry operator: Any Published specification: This document. > >>> Contact: IESG <i...@ietf.org> > >>> Intended usage: This extension describes reverse search query > >>> patterns > >> for RDAP. > >>> Scott > >> I agree. > >> > >> Furthermore, my opinion is that Section 4.1 of RFC7483bis should be > >> updated to treat this use case. I mean, a server should signal in > >> rdapConformance not only the extensions used in building the response > >> but all the supported features. > > So maybe this? > > > > OLD: > > The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings, each > providing a hint as to the specifications used in the construction of the > response. > > > > NEW: > > The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings, each > providing a hint as to the specifications that describe the query and response > formats supported by the server. > > > > Scott > > How about "query and response extensions" ?
That would exclude the core protocol specifications. Is this better? "The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings, each of which describes a query or response specification supported by the server." Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
