[regext] Clarification on ROID Usage for Registrars in Thin Registry RDAP Implementations

2025-01-30 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
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

Re: [regext] Re-chartering REGEXT?

2024-04-16 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hello I fully agree with you. Regards marco On 16.04.24 01:14, George Michaelson wrote: I don't think the new protocol is just a new transport *LAYER* but I also do support re-charter to include consideration of this protocol suite. My reasoning is that we're the people who are going to wind

[regext] NIS2 and impact on EPP

2023-01-31 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hi all, I send this already to gtld-tech group and was then pointed to this group. I wanted to ask if anyone has thought about the impact of NIS2 on EPP, especially the validation of domain holder? There are many issues here regarding protocol and processes. It would be good to work together

Re: [regext] pass on the lower fee

2021-08-18 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hi Martin, I can speak only from my side. we parse the greating and activate from the response different modules in our software. If the namespace is not included, we have to manually add it somewhere. Regards Marco Am 18.08.21 um 14:51 schrieb Martin Casanova: > > Thanks a lot Mario, Thoma

Re: [regext] Use of Internationalized Email Addresses in EPP protocol: placeholder value

2021-08-02 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hi Patrick, Dmitry, and all, I think a new Contact Schema maybe even a new Org Schema are the best solution. Maybe not 2.0 only contact-1.1 that indicate only small changes. It will also goes the normal way in Registry Registrar relation. Registry announce a change of schemas and Registrar have t

Re: [regext] Use of Internationalized Email Addresses in EPP protocol: placeholder value

2021-08-02 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
> JG > >   > >   > >   > > James Gould > > Fellow Engineer > > jgo...@verisign.com > > >   > > 703-948-3271 > > 12061 Bluemont Way > > Reston, VA 20190 > >   > > Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com

Re: [regext] Use of Internationalized Email Addresses in EPP protocol: placeholder value

2021-08-02 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hi All, I am completely with Ulrich. >From policy side and also from aspect of clean data. Using dummy values in objects was always a bad idea. And even in GTLD space, the registrar usually have requirements to verify the contacts. So not only registry must support the EAI also the registrar hav

Re: [regext] EPP and rate-limiting

2020-01-20 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hello, Best rate limiting from my side is done by slowing down the requests. It does not break the client even in other situations. Regeards, Marco Am 17.01.20 um 15:30 schrieb Stephane Bortzmeyer: > Sometimes, some clients are too talkative and, for instance, try > too often to grab a domain.

[regext] Host update and removing V6 glues aka comparison normalized and compressed representation

2018-04-26 Thread InterNetX - Marco Schrieck
Hi All, we found out that different registries have a strange behave while removing v6 addresses. I think its not clearly defined that host address should be normalized for comparison. In our case a host info return: 2001:4b3:624:1::b051 An Update is done with following: 2001:4b3:62