Re: New Standard for Whois

George Belotsky <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.whois
Message-ID <[email protected]>
It is not even necessary to have the new protocol on port 43.

If it is on port 43, however, the service would not adhere to the old
standard when the new protocol is being used.

Hence, the only issue is to detect which protocol is in use, and
follow the right standard.

Parsing the first line of an XML document is sufficient to determine
that XML is being sent.  The entire document does not have to be on
one line.  If the first line is XML, it is assumed that an XML
document follows, and the new protocol is used.

If the first line is not XML, then it is assumed that the old standard
is in effect.  The server immediately returns the result, and closes
the connection. 

George.



On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:20:36PM +0100, Shane Kerr wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
> 
> > > If the Whois stays on Port 43, backwards compatibility is maintained
> > > by the following approach.
> > > 
> > >     1. Accept a connection.
> > >     2. Parse the result.  If XML has been received, go to step 4.
> > >     3. Not XML: as per existing Whois standard, return the result and
> > >        close the connection.
> > >     4. XML has been received: must be the new protocol.  Maintain the
> > >        connection, and use the RRP.  Access will probably be
> > >        restricted, and it may not be possible to modify objects.
> > 
> > what if mirjam and i have an existing application running over
> > whois/43 that uses xml?
> 
> The proposal is to format the Whois *query* as XML.  The only way an
> existing Whois server can do this and still be RFC 954 compliant (now a
> draft standard for over 15 years!) is by sending the entire XML document
> as a single line:
> 
>       Connect to the SRI-NIC service host at TCP service port 43
>       (decimal).
> 
>       Send a single "command line", ending with <CRLF> (ASCII CR and
>       LF).
> 
>       Receive information in response to the command line.  The server
>       closes its connection as soon as the output is finished.
> 
> While possible, does this ever really happen?  I expect not.
> 
> Not that this means that I think the proposal is a good idea....
> 
> --
> Shane
> 
> 

-- 
-----------------------------
George Belotsky
Senior Software Architect
Register.com, inc.
[email protected]
212-798-9127 (phone)
212-798-9876 (fax)
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.