Hello, On 9/29/21 13:01, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> RFC 5731 3.1.1 seems to clearly prevent a <reason> to be sent when > avail="1". > > But RFC 9095 6.1.1 has an example with a <reason> for avail="1". > > So, is it really forbidden to send a <reason> to the client when the > domain is available but you want to send some extra conditions? Technically, it seems to me that the check response in RFC 9095 violates RFC 5731 anyway, because it asks for returning check results in the check response for domain names which were not present in the check command, while RFC 5731 clearly requires the check response to contain "A <domain:name> element that contains the fully qualified name of the queried domain object." Semantically, including a reason for a domain name's availability feels pointless, and the authors of RFC 5731 seemingly thought so, too. Most EPP clients won't expect a reason to be present for avail=1 and will simply ignore it. To me, using the <reason> element to add *conditions* that must be met for the name to be available feels like a misuse of that element. Best regards, Thomas -- TANGO REGISTRY SERVICES® is a product of: Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH Technologiepark Phone: +49 231 9703-222 Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 D-44227 Dortmund E-Mail: supp...@tango-rs.com Germany _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
