Re: [regext] RDAP queries based on redacted properties

Mario, My responses are embedded below. -- JG [cid:image001.png@01D923FC.13858AF0] James Gould Fellow Engineer jgo...@verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com From: Mario Loffredo Date: Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 8:38 AM To: James

[regext] Milestones changed for regext WG

Changed milestone "Submit for publication "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Reverse search capabilities"", set due date to March 2023 from September 2021. URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/regext/about/ ___ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org

[regext] Milestones changed for regext WG

Changed milestone "Submit for publication "Using JSContact in Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) JSON Responses"", set due date to March 2023 from January 2022. Changed milestone "Submit for publication "Redacted Fields in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Response"", set due date

Re: [regext] RDAP queries based on redacted properties

IMHO, James is right. Redaction of handles and correlations to them need to be supported. The fact that they are optional in the base spec is very deliberate. And entities show up in the results of other queries, not just entity lookups. The privacy issue, as I understand it, is that if an entity

Re: [regext] RDAP queries based on redacted properties

I'm getting a little confused, where the ability to redact a field like the mandatory "uid" field in draft-ietf-calext-jscontact and indirectly in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact is needed for privacy reasons. It is up to server policy related to whether to include the "uid" field in the domai

Re: [regext] RDAP queries based on redacted properties

> -Original Message- > From: regext On Behalf Of Gould, James > Sent: Monday, January 9, 2023 12:08 PM > To: a...@hxr.us > Cc: mario.loffr...@iit.cnr.it; regext@ietf.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] RDAP queries based on redacted properties > > Caution: This email originated from out