Re: Domain check in draft-obispo-epp-idn-00.txt
"Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 4 Jan 2012, at 21:19, Michael Young wrote: > Well a domain check is a read only transaction in registry, in a create, you need to hold that create while you validate it in case someone else is racing for the same unique string. Given load balancers and multiple app servers you either time synch at the app server or the DB. Most would go for the DB to lock then you face a rollback if the validation fails. Way back when domain drops weren't rate limited registries faced "add storms". It's not tragic with today's rate limiting controls but I still note why would I encourage any system to do more work unnecessarily,….. So you want us to do the extra work? :) > > Michael Young > > M:647-289-1220 > > On 2012-01-04, at 3:55 PM, Patrik Fältström <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 4 jan 2012, at 21:37, Michael Young wrote: >> >>> What can I say, it would be great if the registrar put that kind of intelligence in their storefront and didn't send domain creates that violate a given language table. >> >> Regardless of whether they do or not, the registry is what finally says yes or no to a registration, right? >> >>> Most registrars aren't making that extensive of an effort. Why? What if the registrar messes up on their filter and denies the registrant a registration the registry actually allows. Ooops starts to sound like a lawsuit, better the registrar makes the registry say no. It's cheaper to say no in domain check than a create. However I think there's room here to satisfy both concerns. >>> >>> Adjust the domain check ext so the language tag element is optional. No language tag and it assumes a straight ASCII registration. >> >> Yes, check should of course have the same argument(s) etc as create. >> >>> Then those registrars that want to validate their own work can and registrars that aren't sure can test a punycode string against the extended domain check. This seems like a compromise that works, thoughts? >> >> Makes sense of course but why do a check and not create directly, that might fail? >> >> You are absolutely correct that a registrar might do a create if they believe they MIGHT have a success. Specifically if you have a race in the form of backorder you do, and you are limited in the number of commands per time unit you are allowed to do. And as you say, a registrar can not risk rejecting a domain registration for a registrant that might in fact work. >> >> If all registries, and I mean all and not only the gTLD registries that the accredited registrars run against, had a few fewer extensions, and used similar rules for things like transfer and whatever else... >> >> So, can you please explain what the problem is with having the registries get some creates that will fail? >> >> Then I will understand better. >> >> Patrik >> > _______________________________________________ > provreg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.mobi/ http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg