Re: ROID how useful?

Thanks James,


On Dec 11, 2012, at 3:12 PM, "Gould, James" <[email protected]> wrote:

> What contains an error, the info response or the transfer query command?
> The domain info response references the contact by ID and not by ROID.  If
> you execute the contact info command of rfc5733, you can get the contact
> ROID. 
> 

For what I can see, any command querying the server that references the ROID, including: domain:info, domain:transfer, and contact:info

Unless it's querying an extension that specifically demands the ROID (history?)


>> 
>> 
>> On Dec 7, 2012, at 6:30 PM, Francisco Obispo <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>>  C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
>>>  C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
>>>  C:  <command>
>>>  C:    <transfer op="query">
>>>  C:      <domain:transfer
>>>  C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
>>>  C:        <domain:name>example.com</domain:name>
>>>  C:        <domain:authInfo>
>>>  C:          <domain:pw roid="JD1234-REP">2fooBAR</domain:pw>
>>>  C:        </domain:authInfo>
>>>  C:      </domain:transfer>
>>>  C:    </transfer>
>>>  C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
>>>  C:  </command>
>>>  C:</epp>
>> 
> 
> The authorization info provided in the transfer command can reference the
> authorization info of the domain (without ROID) or the authorization info
> of the domain's registrant (or contact object) by using the contact's ROID
> and not the contact's ID.  The contact's ID could have been used but the
> contact's ROID uniquely identifies the contact for this use case.
> 

But the contact:id is unique as well right? 

From RFC5733:

  -  A <contact:id> element that contains the desired server-unique
      identifier for the contact to be created.




>> 
>> 
>> It could mean that previous versions of the protocol did in fact use
>> ROIDs as contact identifiers but it seems strange that this is the _only_
>> place where ROIDs are referenced as part of a query, everywhere else the
>> contact:id is used.
> 
> You are correct that this is the only place where the ROID is referenced
> in the rfc commands; although they have been used with other EPP object
> mapping commands as I posted previously to the list.

Yes, and thanks for doing that, but those other commands that you mentioned are Verisign's extensions, and not part of the standard. I agree that there's use for a ROID, but not on the standard set of EPP query/transform commands (not responses).

Also, I don't understand why the format is enforced, when it should've been left open for the registry to decide.



Francisco Obispo 
Director of Applications and Services - ISC
email: [email protected]
Phone: +1 650 423 1374 || INOC-DBA *3557* NOC
PGP KeyID = B38DB1BE

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