On behalf of Roger, Tobias and I, thank you for you review Michael.

Please see my comments in line below.

The updates have been made in github for your review:
https://github.com/seitsu/registry-epp-maintenance/blob/master/draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance.txt>

Let us know if you have any questions or comments

Thanks,
Jody Kolker

-----Original Message-----
From: regext <regext-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Michael Bauland
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 4:23 AM
To: regext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [regext] I-D Action: 
draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance-12.txt

Hi,

I have reviewed the document and support it as it is. Nevertheless, I have the 
following very minor comments/questions.

1 Introduction:
> This mapping provides a
>    mechanism by which EPP servers may notify and EPP clients to query
>    upcoming maintenances.

While I'm not a native speaker, to me it sounds as if the grammar is not 
correct in the second part of the sentence. Maybe the "EPP clients to"
should be replace by "EPP clients can"?

<< JWK
The text has been updated to "EPP clients can"
>>
3.3.  Maintenance Elements:

The <maint:id> content must not be changed. What about the optional "name" 
attribute? There's no rule about it so implementations are free to alter this 
if the ID remains the same. Is that correct/intended?

<< JWK
This is correct, the name attribute can be changed.  We see the ID being used 
as the main identifier to be stored and used to identify the maintenance.  The 
name could be mistyped in subsequent polls or it maybe renamed as the registry 
sees fit, but we would expect the ID to not change.
>>

<maint:host>:
> The affected maintained system contains the hostname, which
>             SHALL be an A-label according to [RFC5891].

This again sounds strange to my (non-native) ears. Shouldn't this perhaps be 
something like:
"The affected maintained system's hostname, which SHALL be an A-label according 
to [RFC5891]."
<<  JWK
Text has been updated.
>>


<maint:environment>:
There must be exactly one environment. If I want to inform about a maintenance 
which affects, e.g., both OT&E and staging I have to send two notifications 
(with two different server unique identifiers). I guess that's a corner case 
that does not happen too often, so it should be ok.
<< JWK
Thanks for your review.  We would see multiple environments needing separate 
poll messages.
>>

<maint:description>:
Would it maybe make sense to allow multiple occurrences with different language 
attributes? If I want to add a German and English description.
I have seen such notifications from some registries (mainly cc) that 
communicate in English and their native tongue.
<< JWK
The maint:description element is unbounded.  If descriptions in different 
languages are needed, they can be sent on the same poll message.
>>


Best regards,

Michael

--
____________________________________________________________________
     |       |
     | knipp |            Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
      -------                    Technologiepark
                                 Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9
                                 44227 Dortmund
                                 Germany

     Dipl.-Informatiker          Fon:    +49 231 9703-0
                                 Fax:    +49 231 9703-200
     Dr. Michael Bauland         SIP:    michael.baul...@knipp.de
     Software Development        E-mail: michael.baul...@knipp.de

                                 Register Court:
                                 Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728

                                 Chief Executive Officers:
                                 Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to