[UA-discuss] RDAP

Maxim Alzoba m.alzoba at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 16:28:44 UTC 2019

Hello All, 

For many years registration data have been in English ( yes, sometimes poorly transliterated, but still),
so I do not think that RDAP implementations of Registries and Registrars will suffer from UA issues, but only due to the 
ASCII  (here I meant the set of characters allowed in RA and RAA 2013 contracts) 
nature of the data in the platforms (real contractual data of a Registrar is not equal to the restoration data, for many reasons).

I do not speak about short implementation time (platforms are already live and punishments for not following SLAs are severe for Registries).

One of the biggest issues is RSEP procedures for Registries (the moment a Registry tries to use non ASCII there - rises Compliance issues ).
And - even if a Registry implements non ASCII output of it's 
RDAP - Registrars have to be big enough to spend time and money on something , which is optional for them.

Sincerely Yours,

Maxim Alzoba
Special projects manager,
International Relations Department,

m. +7 916 6761580(+whatsapp)
skype oldfrogger

Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)

> On 7 Mar 2019, at 12:11, Ram Mohan <rmohan at afilias.info> wrote:
> Andrew
> So long as the repository is at least UTF-8 capable, then there shouldn't be a problem with storing these elements.
> I wonder, however, if Jothan is speaking about using validation checks (what's a valid tld, email, etc.) after receiving the data. Done hastily, that could cause UA issues, although it's got nothing to do with RDAP.
> Although, I don't see why a data storer does not just take what's given by the source and store with high fidelity.
> Ram
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019, 3:01 PM Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:17:32AM +0900, Jothan Frakes wrote:
> > Yes it is designed into the protocol and in a perfect world that would mean
> > yes ir is covered.
> That is certainly not what I was suggesting.
> > We should realize that there is a fast cycle on things being put in place
> > and deployed.
> Fast?  I'm sorry, but we designed this protocol _years and years_ ago.
> ICANN did nothing.
> > Notwithstanding what Andrew said about it being potentially included, I
> > think assuming RDAP will fix storage of Unicode for UA may not be correct
> > unless explicitly stated by a given implementation.
> I think the above betrays a misunderstanding of the
> internationalization support in the wire format.  See section 9 of RFC
> 7480 and section 12.1 of RFC 7483.  Regardless of how you store things
> in the back end, you need to be able to use UTF-8 on the wire.  If the
> point is that maybe your back end can't store everything expressible
> by UTF-8, then it turns out your repository can't actually store all
> the stuff you have registered.
> If on the other hand the problem is that you're storing something from
> someone _else's_ repository, why are you doing that?  Store a referral.
> A
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ua-discuss/attachments/20190307/2cc0be62/attachment.html>

More information about the UA-discuss mailing list