On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, at 15:54, Antoin Verschuren wrote:
> This is a formal adoption request for Extensible Provisioning Protocol
> (EPP) mapping for DNS Time-To-Live (TTL) values:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-regext-brown-epp-ttl/
+1 for adoption as no specific reasons not to have this standardized extension
(but curious how many registries intend to implement it)
Separately,
Two (+1) quick points on the content for draft version 4.
Section 8.1 uses twice the same XML namespace for both cases.
I suspect `:schema:` is missing in the second one.
As for TTL values:
<restriction base="nonNegativeInteger">
<minInclusive value="1"/>
<maxInclusive value="4294967295"/>
</restriction>
The highest bound should be instead 2147483647 seconds.
This comes from RFC 2181:
> The definition of values appropriate to the TTL field in STD 13 is
not as clear as it could be, with respect to how many significant
bits exist, and whether the value is signed or unsigned. It is
hereby specified that a TTL value is an unsigned number, with a
minimum value of 0, and a maximum value of 2147483647. That is, a
maximum of 2^31 - 1.
This is repeated in RFC 8499 (The DNS Terminology RFC), but it does
just quote RFC 2181 again on that.
Also the standard uses 0 as minimum value, but I may not argue this
is better than 1 in the XML schema :-)
Alternatively, personally, I would prefer the value to be given as XML type
of "duration".
This allows to still pass it as seconds for those that prefer that,
but also allows to pass it in more human friendly formats such as number
of minutes, hours, days, etc.
It does make however stating the maximum value possible more complicated
I guess, so maybe not worth doing?
Also, not sure if a single TTL value for everything is enough.
Are we sure that all registries will be fine using the same TTL for
both NS/A/AAAA and DS?
If I take `.com` right now, NS has 2 days of TTL, where DS only one day.
Curious of registries views on that.
HTH,
--
Patrick Mevzek
p...@dotandco.com
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
