Hi all,
Over the past several months, we have been implementing the RDAP
redaction extension, RFC 9537.
This I-D describes the issues we have encountered.
-andy
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537-00.txt
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 03:45:43 -0700
From: internet-dra...@ietf.org
To: Andy Newton <a...@hxr.us>
A new version of Internet-Draft
draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537-00.txt has been
successfully submitted by Andy Newton and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537
Revision: 00
Title: Considerations on RFC 9537
Date: 2024-05-29
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 12
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537-00.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537/
HTML:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537-00.html
HTMLized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-newton-regext-rdap-considerations-on-rfc9537
Abstract:
This document discusses client implementation issues relating to RFC
9537, “Redacted Fields in the Registration Data Access Protocol
(RDAP) Response”. The considerations in this document have arisen
from problems raised by two separate teams attempting to implement
RFC 9537 in both an RDAP web client and an RDAP command line client.
Some of these problems may be insurmountable, leaving portions of RFC
9537 non-interoperable between clients and servers, while other
problems place a high degree of complexity upon clients.
The IETF Secretariat
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
