RE: extensding EPP <update> command for contact
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <046F43A8D79C794FA4733814869CDF07015E475E@dul1wnexmb01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Klaus Malorny [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 4:58 PM > To: janusz > Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] extensding EPP <update> command > for contact > > janusz wrote: > > Scott, > > [...] > > The same section in domain object mapping document contains > a provision > > for EPP domain <update> commands without any element to modify. > > [...] > > > > Janusz Sienkiewicz > > > > While it is possible in the domain mapping (RFC 3731) to > legally create an > update command that does nothing, there is still a sentence > that requires > unnecessary XML (page 27, third paragraph from bottom): > > At least one <domain:add>, <domain:rem>, or <domain:chg> > element MUST > be provided. > > So, RFC 3731 should be included in your considerations. When > we discovered this > problem last year we decided to simply ignore this MUST in our server > implementation and to do not reject the command if such a > condition occurs. I > don't see a reason for the prohibition of an "empty" update anyway. Also fixed in 3731bis. -Scott-