[Public Comments] Draft Comment on Proposed gTLD-Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Profile

[Tomslin Samme-Nlar]

Hi all,
Thanks very much for the thoughtful comments.
@Farzaneh...on your comment below:

>NCSG believes that support for RDAP lookup queries and responses using
both A-label and U-label should be mandatory. >Therefore, we propose that
section 2.1 of the RDAP Technical Implementation Guide should be updated to
“The RDAP server >MUST support Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) RDAP
lookup queries using A-label and U-label format [RFC5890] for >domain names
and name server objects”
>
>FB:  don't agree with this. At the moment we are not sure about the
searchability function for any of the RDAP lookup queries and it should
stay >like that until we understand searchability better. I suggest remove.

My rationale was if there is no technical limitation to support U-label
lookups, as specified in section 6 - RFC 7482 and section 5 - RFC 5891,
then why not support queries in a form more natural to the language
speaker/user? It is not clear to me why there has been no clarity on the
searchability function of RDAP, but if there is support to remove the
comment based on user experience, then I am happy for it to be removed.

----
Tomslin


On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 15:47, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you for the draft Tomslin. I appreciate it very much. I have some
> suggestions and additions. Note that I don't have a technical background so
> I might be wrong. I will continue putting them in the Google doc but since
> the deadline is approaching I thought we tackle issues one by one until the
> deadline:
> In the draft it says:
>
> NCSG believes that support for RDAP lookup queries and responses using
> both A-label and U-label should be mandatory. Therefore, we propose that
> section 2.1 of the RDAP Technical Implementation Guide should be updated to
> “The RDAP server MUST support Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) RDAP
> lookup queries using A-label and U-label format [RFC5890] for domain
> names and name server objects”
>
> FB:  don't agree with this. At the moment we are not sure about the
> searchability function for any of the RDAP lookup queries and it should
> stay like that until we understand searchability better. I suggest remove.
>
> ***
>
> In section 2.2 says “An RDAP server that receives a query string with a
> mixture of A-labels and U-labels SHOULD reject the query” we suggest that
> this mixture of labels should respond appropriately instead of reject
> queries.
>
> FBI:my interpretation of RFC is that it allows to be rejected. I suggest
> delete. see the RFC 7482 : IDNs SHOULD NOT be represented as a mixture of
> A-labels and U-labels; that is, internationalized labels in an IDN SHOULD
> be either all A-labels or all U-labels. It is possible for an RDAP client
> to assemble a query string from multiple independent data sources. Such a
> client might not be able to perform conversions between A-labels
> and U-labels. An RDAP server that receives a query string with a mixture
> of A-labels and U-labels MAY convert all the U-labels to A-labels,
> perform IDNA processing, and proceed with exact-match In such cases, the
> response to be returned to the query source may not match the input from
> the query source. Alternatively, the server MAY refuse to process the
> query.
>
> ****
>
> Section 4.1 mentions just the A-Labels “The name server's name MUST be
> specified in the ldhName in A-label format” and we suggest as in 2.1 that
> should also include U-Labels.
>
>
> FB: I think this should not be a must and should be deleted.
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:46 AM Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Tomslin for drafting. It is very good draft and you tackled many
>> important points. Well done.
>>
>> I have have some minor suggestions.
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24 Sep 2018, at 05:37, Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> As you know, the public comment period for the proposed gTLD-Registration
>> Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Profile  is currently open. It closes on 13
>> October 2018. On behalf of the comment drafting team, please find the link
>> to the NCSG draft we have prepared for your review, edit and comment.
>> *https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g4VtzmTe9qTSC8h8RPuT4HMb0c83odIN75wBdDA2VVg/edit
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g4VtzmTe9qTSC8h8RPuT4HMb0c83odIN75wBdDA2VVg/edit>*
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> ----
>> Tomslin
>>
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181012/118944c5/attachment.htm>