Re: Lists and EPP

Ulrich Wisser <[email protected]> 2011-06-08 10:17
> one of the first question I get everytime I meet registrars is
> 
>   How can I get a list of all my domains?
 
[..]

> I believe a list extension would be really helpful. Due to system
> load a registry might need to make some policies about usage but it
> would make live easier for registries and registrars.

Having been in touch with various registrars dealing with multiple
registries, I can see that as a pattern too, so it seems to me
worthwhile to pursue.

I think we can argue a lot about if this matches EPP goals or not,
however among registries one of the only thing really standardized
today is EPP. Whois is not, DAS is not, access to recently released domain
names is not, registrars reports access is not, etc...

As much as it saddens me, IRIS seems to be dead or close to it,
specifically now with the creation of the IETF WEIRDS non working
group, and having ICANN and ARIN pushing a lot towards REST and
against IRIS (for reasons that I do not believe to be technically
sound).

So investing work to see how this can be done over IRIS would be
probably a waste of time or at least registries/registrars should
start using IRIS for D-CHECK and then extend it.

This leaves us with EPP, as we know today with many extensions doing
the same thing, probably due to the NIH syndrom, and as others have
said because there is little cooperation from registrars.

EPP could be seen as a viable solution. Otherwise everyone is doing
the same thing in a different way.

And I think there are ways to accomodate SLAs and constraints like that.

First, such reports do not need to be realtime. Most often, their
content corresponds to the previous day state or even before. So
registries could implement that using another DB to offload work
and guarantee consistency.

I could see such exchange :

- registrars ask for some report: here we would need to define what
  kind of reports, what kind of filters (if any) & constraints, etc.

- the registry could reply back immediately with an 1001 return code,
so that the report generation would be a background task of low
priority that would be done when possible.
when the generation is complete, the registry would add a notification
message in the registrar queue.
It can of course include just an URI as other have suggested, but I'm
not sure it is the best way.
The report results could be chunked (in slices to be determined by registry
policy) and available as registry messages to be fetched by the
registrar.

If registries/registrars fear the mix of registry notifications
messages related to day to day business and report retrieval,
registries could have a separate EPP server just for reports (or a
separate set of registrars credentials just for that), so that at
least registrars could use the same code, just change the connecting
parameters.

But in both cases we would need to precisely define the 
content/format of the report, and again maybe trying to accomodate as
many cases as possible as seen today and/or defining a way to easily 
extend things without breaking other implementations... as it has been
done in EPP.


-- 
Patrick Mevzek
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg