On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 10:46:52AM +0200, Thomas Corte (TANGO support) wrote: > On 10/7/20 03:17, Tom Harrison wrote: >>>> The question is whether the RDAP protocol should provide guidance >>>> with how to handle overlapping non-unique handles. >>> >>> I don't think it should. A Jasdip pointed out, the definition of a >>> handle notes that they're supposed to be registry-unique. >> >> I agree with Scott and Jasdip on this point. > > I think it's problematic to have a standard like this (which will > eventually have to be implemented by all ICANN-regulated registries) > impose such a requirement (unique handles across all object types) > out of the blue when there are already hundreds of databases out > there that were not build with this assumption in mind.
Entity identifiers aren't RDAP 'entry points', though, in that there are no guarantees that you can take an identifier from some other context and construct a usable query like 'https://rdap.example.net/entity/$identifier' (putting RFC 8521 object tags to one side), so it's not clear that it actually imposes this requirement. For example, it's open to an implementor to prefix their existing identifiers with strings describing the underlying object types, in order to construct unique entity handles. -Tom _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
