Andy,

It may be useful to include guidance for RDAP extensions use of the RDAP JSON 
Values registry in the extensions draft.  I believe that new RDAP extensions 
should be encouraged to support standard values to increase interoperability, 
where extending the RDAP JSON Values registry is better than creating a new 
registry specific to the RDAP extension and certainly better than not 
leveraging the RDAP JSON Values registry at all.  The Redacted Extension did 
this to define three new types with "redacted name", "redacted reason", and 
"redacted expression language", and the language used in the first paragraph of 
section 6.2 supported the extension of the types.  We could look to have any 
new types define the expected format of the values to help support the review 
by the DEs, where some types may be more freeform than others (e.g., support 
mixed case).  For example, the "redacted name" values did use mixed case to 
match the source policy and I believe the "redacted reason" values would be in 
more sentence form with mixed case and potentially punctuation.  The "redacted 
expression language" is more of an identifier, so it could be predefined as 
being only lowercase.  The Versioning Extension has a similar extension of the 
RDAP JSON Values registry types with the "versioning" type and registration of 
the values of "opaque" and "semantic".  I view the "versioning" type as more of 
an identifier, where being lowercase makes sense.  

The extensions draft could clarify the expected value format for the predefined 
types in the RDAP RFCs and provide the guidance for how to define new types 
with the expected value format for future RDAP extensions.

-- 

JG 



James Gould
Fellow Engineer
jgo...@verisign.com 
<applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/jgo...@verisign.com>

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> 




On 8/22/24, 1:45 PM, "Andrew Newton (andy)" <a...@hxr.us <mailto:a...@hxr.us>> 
wrote:


Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe. 


On 8/20/24 09:15, Gould, James wrote:
> Andy,
>
> In reviewing the updates to draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions, I believe that 
> we need to reconsider the criteria for the RDAP JSON Registry values. Based 
> on the types initially defined, the use of lowercase only values may make 
> sense, but for the recently registered values from the RDAP Profile for 
> redaction includes mixed case to exactly match the values in the source 
> policy. The use of lowercase is a non-normative "should", so would future 
> registration requests that have justification for mixed case run into an 
> issue and be considered a violation of the criteria? Should we consider 
> updating the criteria in RFC 9083 based on the implementation experience of 
> the recent registrations or provide additional clarity in 
> draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions?
>
> Thanks,
>
James,


Those are all good points, and I am unaware of any impact on 
implementations from the mixed case registrations. I think the need to 
match text from another document is a good use case and overrides any 
desired "style". I'll change this section in a PR and pass the link when 
it is up. Until then I have created this tracking issue. 
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Zq4w5NqHzo9F6L15R_wLRX0WkvUHoF83pLe4eWxLEsuO64JE79TRPYRH_UVeXEIKpwpR2yn4hvDLf1buT0qfqe_q5IQDcS-9zC7ZVyEfeaY0S2v3JmS7PybtvJOIknRiwar9KLvORxRAOaYPPl_YcJuGjWZtHlOx0hIkaH7aSxR7NbpZvrCvrkCCGBrrHxqNI9Zc6ZNi_qxjpyXEZZr8mFj701Blsl0rXX0_Sandxg8W87sagRZS34NwkbSxkMaR0Uk3dImFBAXes5vD-rZVCn7taRB16m4OGFVX5WuOP-4/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fanewton1998%2Fdraft-regext-rdap-extensions%2Fissues%2F29
 
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Zq4w5NqHzo9F6L15R_wLRX0WkvUHoF83pLe4eWxLEsuO64JE79TRPYRH_UVeXEIKpwpR2yn4hvDLf1buT0qfqe_q5IQDcS-9zC7ZVyEfeaY0S2v3JmS7PybtvJOIknRiwar9KLvORxRAOaYPPl_YcJuGjWZtHlOx0hIkaH7aSxR7NbpZvrCvrkCCGBrrHxqNI9Zc6ZNi_qxjpyXEZZr8mFj701Blsl0rXX0_Sandxg8W87sagRZS34NwkbSxkMaR0Uk3dImFBAXes5vD-rZVCn7taRB16m4OGFVX5WuOP-4/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fanewton1998%2Fdraft-regext-rdap-extensions%2Fissues%2F29>


Thanks for the input.


-andy





_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to