The ROID is generated by the Registry for each type of object supported (e.g., Domain Name in RFC 5731, Host in RFC 5732, Contact in RFC 5733). A thin registry will generate the ROIDs for the Domain Name and Host objects. A thick registry will add support for the Contact objects and the Contact ROID. See section 2.8 of RFC 5730 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5730#section-2.8) and the EPP Repository Identifiers registered in https://www.iana.org/assignments/epp-repository-ids/epp-repository-ids.xhtml used in the ROID suffix. The ROID needs to be a globally unique value for each type of object leveraging the EPP Repository Identifier IANA Registry, generated by the server, and returned to the client in the object info response.
-- JG [cid87442*image001.png@01D960C5.C631DA40] 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/> From: Marco Schrieck <marco.schri...@internetx.com> Date: Friday, January 31, 2025 at 12:09 AM To: "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: [Ext] Clarification on ROID Usage for Registrars in Thin Registry RDAP Implementations 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. Hi Rubens, No its the other way. More and more gTLDs will get thin. Ciao Marco On 31 January 2025 00:31:45 CET, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk=40nic...@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: Don’t the remaining thin registries allow for thin to thick migration on a granular basis ? Rubens Em 30 de jan. de 2025, à(s) 18:24, Marco Schrieck <marco.schri...@internetx.com> escreveu: Hi Yes the registry should generate them, but what with thin Registries. Only we as registrar have the contact data. So we don't have a registry generated roid. I can generate on but the rdap profile checker require me to register the suffix at iana. Eg 1234567-IX If i don't register it we got an error the we use uncorrect value. "Globally unique identifier not registered in EPPROID" At the moment we let it empty and got a warning instead of error. Marco On 30 January 2025 22:00:50 CET, "Andrew Newton (andy)" <a...@hxr.us> wrote: Marco, Assuming you are talking about the 2019 gTLD profile, the registry should be generating the ROIDs because it is also required of them. -andy On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 1:52 PM Marco Schrieck <marco.schri...@internetx.com> wrote: As I understand it must be registered there. But as i can oversee it, there are only Registries. Marco On 30 January 2025 19:42:38 CET, James Mitchell <james.mitch...@iana.org> wrote: My understanding is the EPP ROID is an identifier that is composed of a suffix that identifies the registry/repository to which an object belongs. That repository identifier should be registered in the IANA registry of EPP Repository Identifiers at https://www.iana.org/assignments/epp-repository-ids<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1jnLscMClteISaGbgSKBEm0AfyV-xz7CyAKrhih8RYKbk2tFw7c38E_SncT6PLtv8E1xK38elzTP2Cpd1bplnxEzxBUiRyWJp-N3aYh-qOsC-YN462UBPdk5h-nzmq8eQGyFKFb4QLL-AgUigPiznLbiUs6wwQ1F1RdQ2dKP7RqHLl8mZ8eggfcVpzLESXIa20dwKueeaEfcwAPoEtgyXQMyRxM6Rsn-ZYEBMcpMdZR-63oCrRJ26Dz2VlRdrkwxthv92QzFFkgfNW0ZbDdLzEm0FEvROBl1AWIoI1FVWJk4bYZQAr9VRGRy-BxLyxtTu/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fepp-repository-ids>. I can’t speak to whether a registration is necessary for your use case – that would appear to be up to those writing the (test) requirements. Thanks, James From: InterNetX - Marco Schrieck <marco.schri...@internetx.com> Organization: InterNetX GmbH Date: Thursday, January 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM To: "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org> Subject: [Ext] [regext] Clarification on ROID Usage for Registrars in Thin Registry RDAP Implementations Hi All, I am writing to seek guidance on the handling of ROID (Repository Object IDentifier) in RDAP implementations for registrars together with thin registry models (where registrars hold domain/contact/host data). Our organization acts as a registrar and is working to comply with the RDAP profile outlined in RFC 7483 and related 2019 updates. Context · We operate in a thin registry environment where the registry delegates RDAP queries to registrars. · Our implementation uses registrar-generated identifiers (not ROIDs), as the registry does not assign or store ROIDs. · During RDAP testing, we encountered errors such as “globally unique identifier not registered in EPPROID”, suggesting a mismatch between our identifiers and ROID expectations. Questions 1. RFC 7483 §10.2.4 mentions roid as optional. For registrars in thin models: 2. 3. Is it acceptable to use registrar-generated handles (e.g., UUIDs) instead of ROIDs in RDAP responses? 4. o Are there best practices for mapping internal registrar IDs to RDAP handle or roid fields? o o Did the 2019 discussions formalize any extensions (e.g., custom JSON fields) for registrars to bypass ROID requirements? o o How do we resolve errors like “identifier not registered in EPPROID” if ROIDs are registry-managed but unavailable to registrars? § Thank you for your insights. Ciao Marco -- InterNetX GmbH Johanna-Dachs-Str. 55 • 93055 Regensburg • Germany Tel. +49 941 59559-0 internetx.com • internetx.com/linkedin • internetx.com/twitter Geschäftsführer: Elias Rendón Benger (CEO), Lars Krämer Amtsgericht Regensburg, HRB 7142 ________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org ________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
