Hi Mario,
On Mon 21/Feb/2022 11:34:14 +0100 Mario Loffredo wrote:
Il 21/02/2022 09:54, Alessandro Vesely ha scritto:
On Mon 21/Feb/2022 08:30:53 +0100 Mario Loffredo wrote:
Il 20/02/2022 13:17, Alessandro Vesely ha scritto:
On Wed 16/Feb/2022 15:54:01 +0100 Mario Loffredo wrote:
For what is worth, I would proceed as in the following:
1) If a contact with the abuse role exists:
1.a) If at least one pref parameter exists, I would return only the most
preferred email address;
1.b) If the pref parameter is missing, I would return all the email
addresses in order of appearance.
2) If a contact with the abuse role is missing, I would return no abuse
email address
Hope It could be helpful.
Yup, that's an applicable hint. I'd suggest to publish it as a default
profile in the next RFC. (I don't know how to get profiles, let alone
parsing them. Having a default profile allows to make sense of APNIC's
preferences.)
Don't think this is a matter of an RFC.
Why not?
Because, since the pref parameter can be added to many VCARD properties that
can be included in the RDAP response, what is stated in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6350#section-5.3 seems enough to me.
Special meaning of the pref parameter with regard to the specification of the
abuse mailbox should be decided by each registry autonomously.
That said, it seems to me that the APNIC's response is not ambiguous as it
appears clear (at least to me) which is the preferred abuse mailbox.
Yes, having seen that a pref parameter exists, its usage can be inferred. I
didn't know about it (and haven't yet fixed the program which extracts it from
the RDAP response.)
What I suggested, it can be valid as a general rule applicable to every RDAP
response provided that the server returns a contact with the abuse role.
So the missing paragraph about "pref" could be filed as an erratum to RFC7483?
What should such a missing paragraph say beyond what is stated in section 5.3
of RFC6350 ?
Perhaps, the first paragraph of Appendix A.1 could have had an additional
sentence saying something like so:
For automated usage, it is recommended that, if preference is specified,
only the most preferred element be used.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
