Hi Tobias, Many thanks for your feedback. Please see comments inline
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 8:44 AM Tobias Sattler <satt...@united-domains.de> wrote: > Hi Joseph, > Hi Jim, > > Thanks for updating this draft. > > Some thoughts and comments from my side: > > General thoughts > This document is intended to be informational. Therefore, I think it is > better to avoid the word “standard” in the text. Because it would seem to > be a de facto standard. I think that someone might be irritated by this > later. > I vaguely recalled that some suggested changing this to BCP. Can't find it in the minutes. I keep 'informational' with words 'standard' around for now. Will update on future revisions depends on which way the draft will go. > > Abstract > I would open it up and write about Registries, Registrars, and Resellers. > I add the words 'producer' and 'consumer' next to the term registry operator and the registrar respectively. Would the intro section be better for the elaboration? > > 1. Introduction > I would define “the producer” and “the consumer” by using the example > Registries and Registrars as well as Registrars and Resellers. And > reference later on only to producer and consumer. > But wouldn't registrar be a better understanded term? > > 2. Data Element Specification > I am missing the character encoding. You are mentioning it in section 7. I > would add a reference in section 2 to 7. > Done. > > 2.1.11 Registrar > If you open it up to Resellers, then I would rename it to Consumer. > Would expanding the definition be better? I haven't made any changes to it, want to discuss more on this first. > > 2.2.5. Trade > I would add the field trade here, which is not uncommon in the ccTLD > world. Just to have it right from the start. > Added. Do you know if some ccTLD operators use a custom EPP command on trade (to domain object)? Or it's domain update with a new contact object where the registry operator charges on this specific transaction? > > 2.4.1. Registrar_ID > If you open it up to Resellers, then I would rename it to Consumer_ID > Same as Registrar_ID. > > 3. Report Definition Specification > After reading it, it is not 100% clear to me, what the delimiter is and if > the values should be enclosed with (single or double) quotes. > We referenced RFC4180 regarding CSV. The source mentioned double quotes. > > Appendix A. Acknowledgment > There is a typo in bestpractices.domains. It is bestpractice.domains > without a “s". > Fixed. thanks. The next revision will incorporate the changes mentioned above. And would love to discuss more on items I haven't made changes to. Best, Joseph > > > Best, > Tobias > > > On 2. Nov 2020, at 23:21, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > This draft is a work item of the Registration Protocols Extensions WG of > the IETF. > > > > Title : Simple Registration Reporting > > Authors : Joseph Yee > > James Galvin > > Filename : > draft-ietf-regext-simple-registration-reporting-02.txt > > Pages : 33 > > Date : 2020-11-02 > > > > Abstract: > > Domain name registries and registrars report to each other by sharing > > bulk information through files. This document creates two IANA > > registries to establish a standard reporting mechanism between domain > > name registries and registrars. The first IANA registry lists > > standard data elements and their syntax for inclusion in the files. > > The second IANA registry lists standard reports based on the standard > > data elements. Each report is a file formatted as a CSV file. The > > advantage of this reporting mechanism is that report, each file, can > > be imported by recipients without any prior knowledge of their > > contents, although reporting is enhanced with a minimum of knowledge > > about the files. The mechanism for the transmission and reception of > > the files is a matter of local policy. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-simple-registration-reporting/ > > > > There is also an HTML version available at: > > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-regext-simple-registration-reporting-02.html > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-regext-simple-registration-reporting-02 > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 >
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
