RE: EPP over UDP for Domain Availability Checking?
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <5BEA6CDB196A4241B8BE129D309AA4AF01A6FFA5@vsvapostal8.vasrv.verisign.com> |
> First, one has to presume that this is external to the PROVREG WG > effort. (The charter would forbid it on a number of grounds.) > Nevertheless, this ought to be considered - and recall that this list > will outlive the WG. (It's not a matter of scope for the list.) Right -- I just figured that there are people on the list who might have an interest in the topic. > Who gets to be the client? I would assume there are a lot more who > would want this data than just the registrars. > > How does this fit next to what the CRISP WG is chartered to do? The > difference between transports (UDP vs. connection oriented) is > significant. This is something that would need to be looked at. Andy and I had a chance to talk live yesterday; I think we both believe that there might be some use cases that avoid an intersection with CRISP. There _might_ be for a registry that wants to deploy both protocols. At a minimum, a light EPP UDP <check> might be a useful feature for a registry that wants to deploy EPP, but not the CRISP protocol. Anyway, it's something to talk about over a beer in Minneapolis. -Scott-