Re: Changes we'd make to EPP, was Re: Domain check in draft-obispo-epp-idn-00.txt

You are right about synchronization, the registry needs to inform the
registrar what its doing.  Not sure the poll queue is a viable mechanism
for that, but its the closest thing we have right now. We can do better
though.

This is definitely an area that should be worked on, some of the new
registry use cases introduce new/additional contact types increasing the
problem size.

-M



On 12-01-17 11:28 AM, "Patrik Fältström" <[email protected]> wrote:

>The problem here is that once again registries talk about "bloat" and
>"increased cost" and because of that want to do operations that imply
>inconsistencies with registrars databases, while registrars argue that
>for them it is not a problem at all with many contact records and that it
>is worse if registries make commands that have implications in their
>database.
>
>Is this not a clear sign we must be better on working together?
>
>My suggestion was because of that that registrars make the gc command and
>registries report back what was deleted.
>
>Only then registrars can immediately register again objects that must
>stay.
>
>   Patrik
>
>
>
>
>On 17 jan 2012, at 17:58, MICHAEL YOUNG <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I think there needs to be a reasonable period where you can determine a
>> contact object has been abandoned.  Is there really a point to leaving
>> contacts around that haven't been associated for years?
>> 
>> That's certainly the case in the older EPP registries - contact bloat.
>> Where this gets to be annoying is in escrow deposits - costs money for
>>no
>> added value to anyone. Why bloat up escrow deposits with a bunch of dead
>> contacts in the first place?
>> 
>> Just sayin,……..
>> 
>> Michael
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 12-01-17 10:41 AM, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Registry operators have got to get out of their vacuum mentality
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 17 Jan 2012, at 16:29, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 17 jan 2012, at 09:48, Theo Kramer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I can see none. Garbage collection is a function of registry
>>>>> maintenance imo.
>>>> 
>>>> A registry can not know if an existing contact record is to be
>>>> connected to a domain name that is to be created, as by definition
>>>> contact records must exist with the registry that is not connected to
>>>> any domain object.
>>>> 
>>>>  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.biz
>>> http://mneylon.tel
>>> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
>>> US: 213-233-1612
>>> UK: 0844 484 9361
>>> Locall: 1850 929 929
>>> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>>> Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight
>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
>>> -------------------------------
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 


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