On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 6:57 PM James Mitchell <james.mitch...@iana.org> wrote: > > > The new gTLD Response profile > (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rdap-response-profile-21feb24-en.pdf) > says … “a value with the RDAP lookup path that generated the RDAP > response.”, requirements 2.6.3 and 2.10. Unless you are referring to another > document, this is quite different from the RDAP base URL. I would interpret > requests under this profile for /domains/EXAMPLE.COM and /domains/example.com > to set the link context to /domains/EXAMPLE.COM and /domains/example.com > respectively (or less contrived, lookups for /domain/xn--bcher-kva and > /domain/b%C3%BCcher to have different link contexts) >
I was thinking of 2.4.6 which sets the link context to the Base URL of the registrar, which seems mighty useful. I agree with your interpretation of 2.6.3 and 2.10 > > > It seems a shame that the spec did not allow the undefined link context to be > interpreted as the request URI. However we are where we are and the link > context is now mandatory. If someone can shed some light on the utility of > the link context then I can look to support that with our server. Otherwise > I’ll likely hold onto on the RFC 7483 requirements for links. > What's the issue with setting it to the request URI? -andy _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
