Thank you Erik,
Comments below are prefixed with Authors-.
A new version has been published here:
Regards,
Gustavo
On 8/25/20, 17:47, "Erik Kline via Datatracker" <nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping-09: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html__;!!PtGJab4!oublqDZDSArqbWBQnbFor1rxwDgavlq-WBXYt_Cr9S7UqhIyOUn0WdGP8hxc-QTzTjHzr-r7-Q0$
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping/__;!!PtGJab4!oublqDZDSArqbWBQnbFor1rxwDgavlq-WBXYt_Cr9S7UqhIyOUn0WdGP8hxc-QTzTjHzztI-XAo$
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[ section 4.5 ]
* For text representations you want RFC 5952 rather than 4291.
Authors- fixed in the next version of the I-D.
[ section 5.1.2.1.5, 5.2.2.1.3 ]
* It's not clear that ",v4" or ",v6" are adding anything. The IP address
family should be unambiguous without the hint.
No change necessary, it just seems like this isn't really needed. (For
example, if there's even a remote possibility someone might try to list
IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses -- or even worse, compat addresses -- then
there are going some other, much bigger problems ahead.)
Authors- it's a hint for verification to the party restoring the deposit
[ section 5.4.1.1 ]
* Is it recommended at all that rdeRegistrar:url be https whenever possible?
Authors- text added in the next version of the I-D.
* In addition to whois name/url should there RDAP information? Or is the
http/https whois URL expected to handle RDAP?
Authors- the industry is moving away for storing the base URL for the RDAP
services in the SRS. See RFC7484, and
https://www.iana.org/assignments/registrar-ids/registrar-ids.xhtml. There have
been conversations of having a generic bootstrap-like for Registrars to
accommodate non-gTLDs. If there is a specific need to store this information in
the deposit, an extension can be created.
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
