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

On 18/01/12 10:12, Ulrich Wisser wrote:
> James,
> 
> I believe I've been a bit to vague on my proposal. I would of course embed
> these answers in the <epp:resData/> part of the poll response. 5730 specifies
> that this can be done with <obj:trnData/>, so <obj:creData/> and
> <obj:infData/> should be possible too. This way at least for
> create/update/renew/transfer should be covered by rfc 5730. The problem is to
> determine if the message is in response to a former request from the registrar
> or registry initiated. But that might not even be so important. In any case
> the registry is letting the registrar know that an object has been changed.
> 
> And yes, the usage of <obj:delete/> is "creative". Unfortunately is is no
> <obj:delData/> defined.

My one objection to that is that it doesn't really allow for batch
notifications: there's a separate notification sent out for each and every
object being garbage collected, which is chatty. Deletion notifications
are something, just like with availability checks, that are amenable to
batching, and, in fact, benefit from being batched, so batching is a win.

K.

-- 
Keith Gaughan, Senior Developer
PGP/GPG key ID: 3E896381
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd. <http://blacknight.com/>
12A Barrowside Business Park, Carlow, Ireland
Registered in Ireland, Company No.: 370845
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg