Re: Result Codes (Re: Standard Extensions)
"Ucom.ch - Bernie Hoeneisen" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Wil Tan wrote: > I wonder if there's any value in some of us getting together to author > an informational draft documenting existing behaviours surrounding the > use of result codes. Specifically, we could list the error conditions > and the corresponding result codes that are returned by servers "in > the wild". This would help future implementers, both from a client's > and server's perspective, to at least not diverge further. > Furthermore, it would perhaps become apparent if an extension is > needed. This certainly helps, but does not solve the basic issue, which I'd call a flaw in the main EPP specs. Those specify a limited set of status codes, restricted by XML schema. Any _clean_ extension would require a change in a rather core EPP XML schema, which nobody likes to touch (for good reasons). At next revision of EPP core specs, that affected XML shemata should be relaxed to allow any 4 digit code as status code. Along with this, guidelines should be defined for registration of additional status codes with IANA (e.g. Expert Review policy). Comments? cheers, Bernie -- http://ucom.ch/ Tech Consulting for Internet Technology _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg