[gtld-tech] EPDP recommendations and EPP

[Gavin Brown]

> It would be much easier for everyone if the required fields for all contact types matched the required fields of the EPP RFC; otherwise we will run into policy that is overriding RFC compliance issues and implementation problems for both the client and the server.  

To me that would be the tail wagging the dog. Technology has to support
policy, not vice versa.

> We could adjust what fields are displayed by type in RDAP instead of in EPP.  Keep the minimum fields collected consistent and compliant with the RFC and adjust what fields that are returned in the RDAP responses.

The EPDP report explicitly describes what data elements are *transferred
from registrar to registry*, not what is *displayed* in RDDS.
Transferring those elements would be in breach of the recommendation,
even if the fields were not displayed.

G.

-- 
Gavin Brown
Chief Technology Officer
CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC)
Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services
for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries
https://www.centralnic.com/
+44.7548243029

CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London,
EC2R 6AR.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/attachments/20190227/fe467cbf/signature-0001.asc>