Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Reverse search capabilities
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-11
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (regext WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mario Loffredo , Maurizio Martinelli | ||
| Last updated | 2022-05-02 | ||
| Replaces | draft-loffredo-regext-rdap-reverse-search | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | plain text html xml htmlized pdfized bibtex | ||
| Stream | WG state | In WG Last Call | |
| Associated WG milestone |
|
||
| Document shepherd | Tom Harrison | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | tomh@apnic.net |
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-11
Registration Protocols Extensions M. Loffredo
Internet-Draft M. Martinelli
Intended status: Standards Track IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Expires: 3 November 2022 2 May 2022
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Reverse search capabilities
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-11
Abstract
The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) does not include query
capabilities for finding the list of domains related to a set of
entities matching a given search pattern. In the RDAP context, an
entity can be associated with any defined object class. Moreover,
other relationships between object classes exist and might be used
for providing a reverse search capability. Therefore, a reverse
search can be applied to other use cases than the classic domain-
entity scenario. This document describes an RDAP extension that
allow servers to provide a reverse search feature based on the
relationship defined in RDAP between an object class for search and
any related object class. The reverse search based on the domain-
entity relationship is treated as a particular case.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 November 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. RDAP Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. RDAP Response Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Reverse Searches Based on Entity Details . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. RDAP Conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.2. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Client . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix A. Paradigms to Enforce Access Control on Reverse Search
in RDAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
Reverse Whois is a service provided by many web applications that
allows users to find domain names owned by an individual or a company
starting from the owner's details, such as name and email. Even if
it has been considered useful for some legal purposes (e.g.
uncovering trademark infringements, detecting cybercrimes), its
availability as a standardized Whois capability has been objected to
for two main reasons, which now don't seem to conflict with an RDAP
implementation.
The first objection concerns the potential risks of privacy
violation. However, the domain name community is considering a new
generation of Registration Directory Services [ICANN-RDS1]
[ICANN-RDS2] [ICANN-RA], which provide access to sensitive data under
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
some permissible purposes and in accordance with appropriate policies
for requestor accreditation, authentication and authorization.
RDAP's reliance on HTTP means that it can make use of common HTTP-
based approaches to authentication and authorization, making it more
useful than Whois [RFC3912] in the context of such directory
services. Since RDAP consequently permits a reverse search
implementation complying with privacy protection principles, this
objection is not well-founded.
The other objection to the implementation of a reverse search
capability has been connected with its impact on server processing.
However, the core RDAP specifications already define search queries,
with similar processing requirements, so the distinction on which
this objection is based is not clear.
Reverse searches, such as finding the list of domain names associated
with contacts or nameservers, may be useful to registrars as well.
Usually, registries adopt out-of-band solutions to provide results to
registrars asking for reverse searches on their domains. Possible
reasons for such requests are:
* the loss of synchronization between the registrar database and the
registry database;
* the need for such data to perform bulk EPP [RFC5730] updates (e.g.
changing the contacts of a set of domains, etc.).
Currently, RDAP does not provide any means for a client to search for
the collection of domains associated with an entity [RFC9082]. A
query (lookup or search) on domains can return the array of entities
related to a domain with different roles (registrant, registrar,
administrative, technical, reseller, etc.), but the reverse operation
is not allowed. Only reverse searches to find the collection of
domains related to a nameserver (ldhName or ip) can be requested.
Since an entity can be in relationship with any RDAP object
[RFC9083], the availability of a reverse search as largely intended
can be common to all the object classes allowed for search. Through
a further step of generalization, the meaning of reverse search in
the RDAP context can be extended to include any query for retrieving
all the objects in relationship with another matching a given search
pattern.
The protocol described in this specification aims to extend the RDAP
query capabilities to enable reverse search based on the
relationships defined in RDAP between an object class for search and
a related object class. The reverse search based on the domain-
entity relationship is treated as a particular case of such a generic
query model.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. RDAP Path Segment Specification
A generic reverse search path is described by the syntax:
{searchable-resource-type}/reverse_search_0/{related-resource-
type}?<search-condition>
The path segments are defined as in the following:
* searchable-resource-type: it MUST be one of the resource types for
search defined in Section 3.2 of [RFC9082] (i.e. "domains",
"nameservers" and "entities") or a resource type extension;
* related-resource-type: it MUST be one of the resource types for
lookup defined in Section 3.1 of [RFC9082] (i.e. "domain",
"nameserver", "entity", "ip" and "autnum") or a resource type
extension;
* search-condition: a sequence of "property=search pattern"
predicates separated by the ampersand character ('&', US-ASCII
value 0x0026). Each "property" represents a JSON object property
of the RDAP object class corresponding to "related-resource-type".
Objects are only included in the search results if they satisfy
all included predicates. This includes predicates that are for
the same property: it is necessary in such a case for the related
object to match against each of those predicates. Based on their
policy, servers MAY restrict the usage of predicates to make a
valid search condition, by returning a 400 (Bad Request) response
when a problematic request is received.
While related-resource-type is defined as having one of a number of
different values, the only searches defined in this document are for
a related-resource-type of "entity". Searches for the other resource
types specified in [RFC9082] and resource type extensions may be
defined by future documents.
Partial string matching in search patterns is allowed as defined in
section 4.1 of [RFC9082].
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
3. RDAP Response Specification
Reverse search responses use the formats defined in section 8 of
[RFC9083], which correspond to the searchable resource types defined
in Section 2.
4. Reverse Searches Based on Entity Details
Since in RDAP, an entity can be associated with any other object
class, the most common kind of reverse search is one based on an
entity's details. Such reverse searches arise from the query model
by setting the related resource type to "entity".
By selecting a specific searchable resource type, the resulting
reverse search aims at retrieving all the objects (e.g. all the
domains) that are related to any entity object matching the search
conditions.
This section defines the following reverse search properties servers
SHOULD support regardless of the searchable resource type being
selected:
Reverse search property: role
RDAP property: $..entities[*].roles
Reference: Section 10.2.4 of [RFC9083]
Reverse search property: handle
RDAP property: $..entities[*].handle
Reference: Section 5.1 of [RFC9083]
Reverse search property: fn
RDAP property: $..entities[*].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]
Reference: Section 6.2.1 of [RFC6350]
Reverse search property: email
RDAP property: $..entities[*].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='email')][3]
Reference: Section 6.4.2 of [RFC6350]
The mapping between the reverse search property and the corresponding
RDAP response property is done through the use of a JSONPath
expression [I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base].
The presence of a predicate on the reverse search property "role"
means that the RDAP response property "roles" must contain at least
the specified role.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
The last two properties are related to jCard elements [RFC7095], but
the field references are to vCard [RFC6350], since jCard is the JSON
format for vCard.
Examples of reverse search paths based on the domain-entity
relationship are presented in Figure 1.
/domains/reverse_search_0/entity?handle=CID-40*&role=technical
/domains/reverse_search_0/entity?fn=Bobby*&role=registrant
/domains/reverse_search_0/entity?handle=RegistrarX&role=registrar
Figure 1
Documents that deprecate or restructure RDAP responses such that one
or more of the properties listed above becomes invalid MUST either
note that the relevant reverse search is no longer available (in the
case of deprecation) or describe how to continue supporting the
relevant search by way of some new RDAP property (in the case of
restructuring).
A server that includes additional fields in its objects in accordance
with the extensibility provisions of section 6 of [RFC7480] MAY
support the use of those fields in search conditions, in the same way
as for the search conditions defined in this section. Support for
such fields in the reverse search context MUST be documented in the
extension specification.
5. RDAP Conformance
Servers complying with this specification MUST include the value
"reverse_search_0" in the rdapConformance property of the help
response [RFC9083]. The information needed to register this value in
the "RDAP Extensions" registry is described in Section 8.
6. Implementation Considerations
To limit the impact of processing the search predicates, servers are
RECOMMENDED to make use of indexes and similar functionality in their
underlying data store. In addition, risks with respect to
performance degradation or result set generation can be mitigated by
adopting practices used for standard searches, e.g. restricting the
search functionality, limiting the rate of search requests according
to the user's authorization, truncating and paging the results, and
returning partial responses.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
7. Implementation Status
NOTE: Please remove this section and the reference to RFC 7942 prior
to publication as an RFC.
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942].
The description of implementations in this section is intended to
assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort
has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not
be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
exist.
According to RFC 7942, "this will allow reviewers and working groups
to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
they see fit".
7.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Server
* Responsible Organization: Institute of Informatics and Telematics
of National Research Council (IIT-CNR)/Registro.it
* Location: https://rdap.pubtest.nic.it/
* Description: This implementation includes support for RDAP queries
using data from the public test environment of .it ccTLD. Reverse
search is allowed to authenticated users. Registrar users are
allowed to perform reverse searches on their own domains and
contacts. This is achieved by adding an implicit predicate to the
search condition.
* Level of Maturity: This is an "alpha" test implementation.
* Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features
described in this specification.
* Contact Information: Mario Loffredo, mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it
7.2. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Client
* Responsible Organization: Institute of Informatics and Telematics
of National Research Council (IIT-CNR)/Registro.it
* Location: https://web-rdap.pubtest.nic.it/
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
* Description: This is a Javascript web-based RDAP client. RDAP
responses are retrieved from RDAP servers by the browser, parsed
into an HTML representation, and displayed in a format improving
the user experience. Reverse search is allowed to authenticated
users.
* Level of Maturity: This is an "alpha" test implementation.
* Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features
described in this specification.
* Contact Information: Francesco Donini, francesco.donini@iit.cnr.it
8. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to register the following value in the RDAP
Extensions Registry:
* Extension identifier: reverse_search_0
* Registry operator: Any
* Published specification: This document.
* Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>
* Intended usage: This extension describes reverse search query
patterns for RDAP.
9. Privacy Considerations
The search functionality defined in this document may affect the
privacy of entities in the registry (and elsewhere) in various ways:
see [RFC6973] for a general treatment of privacy in protocol
specifications. Registry operators should be aware of the tradeoffs
that result from implementation of this functionality.
Many jurisdictions have laws or regulations that restrict the use of
"Personal Data", per the definition in [RFC6973]. Given that,
registry operators should ascertain whether the regulatory
environment in which they operate permits implementation of the
functionality defined in this document.
In general, given the sensitivity of this functionality,it SHOULD be
accessible to authorized users only, and for specific use cases only.
Since reverse search requests and responses could contain Personally
Identifiable Information (PII), reverse search functionality SHOULD
be available over HTTPS only.
Providing reverse search in RDAP carries the following threats as
described in [RFC6973]:
* Correlation
* Disclosure
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
* Misuse of information
Therefore, RDAP providers are REQUIRED to mitigate the risk of those
threats by implementing appropriate measures supported by security
services (see Section 10).
10. Security Considerations
Security services required to provide controlled access to the
operations specified in this document are described in [RFC7481]. A
non-exhaustive list of access control paradigms an RDAP provider can
implement is presented in Appendix A.
The specification of the relationship within the reverse search path
allows the RDAP servers to implement different authorization policies
on a per-relationship basis.
11. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for
their contributions to this document: Francesco Donini, Scott
Hollenbeck, Francisco Arias, Gustavo Lozano, Eduardo Alvarez, Ulrich
Wisser and James Gould.
Tom Harrison and Jasdip Singh provided relevant feedback and constant
support to the implementation of this proposal. Their contributions
have been greatly appreciated.
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[OIDCC] OpenID Foundation, "OpenID Connect Core incorporating
errata set 1", November 2014,
<http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3912] Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3912, September 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3912>.
[RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
[RFC6350] Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6350, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6350>.
[RFC6973] Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J.,
Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy
Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6973, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6973>.
[RFC7095] Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7095, January 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7095>.
[RFC7480] Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 7480, DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>.
[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 7481, DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC9082] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9082>.
[RFC9083] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "JSON Responses for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
RFC 9083, DOI 10.17487/RFC9083, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9083>.
12.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-jsonpath-base]
Gössner, S., Normington, G., and C. Bormann, "JSONPath:
Query expressions for JSON", Work in Progress, Internet-
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
Draft, draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-03, 16 January 2022,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-
03.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-openid]
Hollenbeck, S., "Federated Authentication for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) using OpenID
Connect", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
regext-rdap-openid-08, 8 November 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-
openid-08.txt>.
[ICANN-RA] Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers,
"Registry Agreement", July 2017,
<https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/
agreements/agreement-approved-31jul17-en.pdf>.
[ICANN-RDS1]
Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers,
"Final Report from the Expert Working Group on gTLD
Directory Services: A Next-Generation Registration
Directory Service (RDS)", June 2014,
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-
06jun14-en.pdf>.
[ICANN-RDS2]
Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers,
"Final Issue Report on a Next-Generation gTLD RDS to
Replace WHOIS", October 2015,
<http://whois.icann.org/sites/default/files/files/final-
issue-report-next-generation-rds-07oct15-en.pdf>.
Appendix A. Paradigms to Enforce Access Control on Reverse Search in
RDAP
Access control can be implemented according to different paradigms
introducing increasingly stringent rules. The paradigms reported
here in the following leverage the capabilities either supported
natively or provided as extensions by the OpenID Connect [OIDCC]:
* Role-Based Access Control: access rights are granted depending on
roles. Generally, this is done by grouping users into fixed
categories and assigning static grants to each category. A more
dynamic approach can be implemented by using the OpenID Connect
"scope" claim;
* Purpose-Based Access Control: access rules are based on the notion
of purpose, being the intended use of some data by a user. It can
be implemented by tagging a request with the usage purpose and
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
making the RDAP server check the compliance between the given
purpose and the control rules applied to the data to be returned.
The purpose can be stated within an out-of-band process by setting
the OpenID Connect RDAP-specific "purpose" claim as defined in
[I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-openid];
* Attribute-Based Access Control: rules to manage access rights are
evaluated and applied according to specific attributes describing
the context within which data are requested. It can be
implemented by setting within an out-of-band process additional
OpenID Connect claims describing the request context and making
the RDAP server check the compliance between the given context and
the control rules applied to the data to be returned;
* Time-Based Access Control: data access is allowed for a limited
time only. It can be implemented by assigning the users with
temporary credentials linked to access grants whose scope is
limited.
Appendix B. Change Log
00: Initial working group version ported from draft-loffredo-regext-
rdap-reverse-search-04
01: Updated "Privacy Considerations" section.
02: Revised the text.
03: Refactored the query model.
04: Keepalive refresh.
05: Reorganized "Abstract". Corrected "Conventions Used in This
Document" section. Added "RDAP Conformance" section. Changed
"IANA Considerations" section. Added references to RFC7095 and
RFC8174. Other minor edits.
06: Updated "Privacy Considerations", "Security Considerations" and
"Acknowledgements" sections. Added some normative and informative
references. Added Appendix A.
07: Updated normative references.
08: Changed "Implementation Status" section. Updated informative
references.
09: Extended the query model to represent a reverse search based on
any relationship between the RDAP object classes. Changed the
path segment "role" into a query parameter.
10: Updated "Reverse Searches Based on Entity Details" section to
consider the use of JSContact format instead of jCard. Added
references to JSContact documents.
11: Updated the document based on Tom Harrison and James Gould
feedback:
* Updated section "RDAP Path Segment Specification":
- Clarified how servers must evaluate a reverse search
including predicates that are for the same property.
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft RDAP Reverse search May 2022
- Specified the error response servers must return when
receiving a wrong reverse search request according to their
policy.
- Clarified that searchs for the related-resource-type values
other than "entity" may be defined in future documents.
* Reviewed text in section "Reverse Searches Based on Entity
Details" about reverse searches based on custom response
extensions.
* Removed references to JSContact documents in section "Reverse
Searches Based on Entity Details". Moved the mapping between
jCard properties used in the RDAP response and JSContact
counterparts to draft-ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact.
* Added section "RDAP Response Specification".
* Changed the text to present reverse search as a single
extension with multiple features.
* Changed the definition of searchable-resource-type and related-
resource-type to consider also the resource type extensions.
* Replaced "reverse" with "reverse_search_0" in the generic
reverse search path. Updated Figure 1 accordingly.
* Removed the phrase "but with a special focus on its privacy
implications" from both the "Abstract" and the "Introduction".
Moved the mapping between jCard properties used in the RDAP
response and JSContact counterparts to draft-ietf-regext-rdap-
jscontact.
* Reviewed the text of "Privacy Considerations" section.
* Text cleaning.
Authors' Addresses
Mario Loffredo
IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Via Moruzzi,1
56124 Pisa
Italy
Email: mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it
URI: http://www.iit.cnr.it
Maurizio Martinelli
IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Via Moruzzi,1
56124 Pisa
Italy
Email: maurizio.martinelli@iit.cnr.it
URI: http://www.iit.cnr.it
Loffredo & Martinelli Expires 3 November 2022 [Page 13]