> You would only need an EPP extension in the scenario where different domains under the sponsorship of the same registrar would need different DSYNC information.
This would very much be the case with resellers, or even a registrar using one ICANN accreditation for multiple somewhat operationally distinct brands. ------------------------------ Any statements contained in this email are personal to the author and are not necessarily the statements of the company unless specifically stated. AS207960 Cyfyngedig, having a registered office at 13 Pen-y-lan Terrace, Caerdydd, Cymru, CF23 9EU, trading as Glauca Digital, is a company registered in Wales under № 12417574 <https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12417574>, LEI 875500FXNCJPAPF3PD10. ICO register №: ZA782876 <https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/ZA782876>. UK VAT №: GB378323867. EU VAT №: EU372013983. Turkish VAT №: 0861333524. South Korean VAT №: 522-80-03080. AS207960 Ewrop OÜ, having a registered office at Lääne-Viru maakond, Tapa vald, Porkuni küla, Lossi tn 1, 46001, trading as Glauca Digital, is a company registered in Estonia under № 16755226. Estonian VAT №: EE102625532. Glauca Digital and the Glauca logo are registered trademarks in the UK, under № UK00003718474 and № UK00003718468, respectively. On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 at 10:00, Gavin Brown <gavin.br...@icann.org> wrote: > > > > On 30 Jul 2024, at 08:13, Q Misell <q=40as207960....@dmarc.ietf.org> > wrote: > > > > Moin, > > > > There has been work recently in DNSOP on Generalised DNS Notifications ( > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-generalized-notify-02.html > [ietf.org]). > > This draft is mostly targeted at CDS/CDNSKEY, but is general to other > notifications. > > > > As the draft currently stands this requires a record at example._ > dsync.com [dsync.com] to direct notifications for example.com [example.com]. > In some cases the target for these notifications would usefully be the > registry, however in others the notifications would be better routed to the > registrar (e.g. in the case of a registrar implementing CDS themselves). > > > > Adding these records to the parent's DNS would require an extension to > EPP; is there an appetite in the WG for an EPP extension to manage these > DSYNC records? > > This is not necessarily true. It may be the case that each registrar would > have a single DSYNC configuration for all its domains under management, in > which case it is information that can be collected once at onboarding (or > when the registry begins supporting DSYNC). > > You would only need an EPP extension in the scenario where different > domains under the sponsorship of the same registrar would need different > DSYNC information. > > It would be worth validating this assumption before going to the effort of > developing an extension. > > G. > > -- > Gavin Brown > Principal Engineer, Global Domains & Strategy > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > https://www.icann.org > >
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
