[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDAP for Registration Data Service Upgrade?

nathalie coupet nathaliecoupet at yahoo.com
Wed May 25 14:15:38 UTC 2016

Could we have a brief explanation of why RDAP is the better protocol of them all? (A really short summary would do) Nathalie Coupet  

    On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 10:03 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck at verisign.com> wrote:

If we decide that an RDDS is needed, we’re going to have to find a way to provide that service using one of the options (WHOIS, WHOIS++, RWHOIS, IRIS, or RDAP) that are already available. RDAP is our best option.

Confession.  My interest in these matters always cleave to the end game. So I have spent a lot of time digging and was lucky enough to be tutored some. [Largely by Scott in an EWG subteam.]​
On the balance of the evidence and given the endgame, I am unanimous that for a functional RDDS with a certain form to it, RDAP and its evolution seems our best bet to address all the known registration data issues and to project a globally-acceptable framework here forward.

Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160525/fa05a2ab/attachment.html>

More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list