[TSG-Access-RD] [Ext] Re: Proposed Assumption Additions

[Steve Crocker]

This is all somewhat backwards.  Let's have a clean specification of the
required functionality and not overspecify what form the solution takes.
Yes, I understand we want to make use of existing protocols, particularly
RDAP, and it's perfectly fine to include the *desire* to make use of RDAP
and to say whatever else is *desired* in the solution, but let's try to
entangle what is essentially commentary about the solution with what the
actual requirements are.

Steve


On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 3:13 PM Francisco Arias <francisco.arias at icann.org>
wrote:

> I know the base RFCs are lacking things we may need, that is why I
> proposed to keep in scope RDAP extensions regarding authentication,
> authorization, auditing. I don't think it is ok to assume a certain
> solution would be used, just because there is already a draft.
>
> Alternatively, perhaps we should simply say that bulk queries are out of
> scope?
>
> --
> Francisco
>
>
> On 12/18/18, 11:02 AM, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck at verisign.com>
> wrote:
>
>     The problem with the core RFCs is that they don’t include the
> functionality we need for the kind of authorization that we’re talking
> about. That’s why I wrote my federated authentication draft. It includes
> features that address a number of questions proposed in the charter.
>
>     I would agree with that amendment to #7. I’m not comfortable with
> assuming that practices implemented to deal with the limitations of WHOIS
> should be continued.
>
>     Scott
>
>     > On Dec 18, 2018, at 1:44 PM, Francisco Arias <
> francisco.arias at icann.org> wrote:
>     >
>     > Re: #6, it should be core RDAP RFCs only (i.e., not the drafts since
> they are not part of the standard). And we may need to say that the only
> RDAP extensions we are going to consider are regarding authentication,
> authorization, auditing.
>     >
>     > Re: #7, I think we only need to assume that redaction of certain
> fields will continue beyond the temp spec.
>     >
>     > --
>     > Francisco
>     >
>     > On 12/18/18, 10:22 AM, "TSG-Access-RD on behalf of Hollenbeck, Scott
> via TSG-Access-RD" <tsg-access-rd-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
> tsg-access-rd at icann.org> wrote:
>     >
>     >    As discussed on today's call:
>     >
>     >    6.      We are limited to RDAP capabilities as specified in the
> core RDAP RFCs and published Internet-Draft documents.
>     >    7.      The method of redaction and display of non-public data as
> described in the temporary specification for WHOIS will be expected to be
> implemented in RDAP.
>     >
>     >    Scott
>     >
>     >
>     >
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tsg-access-rd/attachments/20181218/28ca04f9/attachment-0001.html>