Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Parameters for Result Sorting and Paging
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging-00

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00

Registration Protocols Extensions                            M. Loffredo
Internet-Draft                                             M. Martinelli
Intended status: Standards Track                     IIT-CNR/Registro.it
Expires: August 5, 2019                                    S. Hollenbeck
                                                           Verisign Labs
                                                        February 1, 2019

  Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Parameters for Result
                           Sorting and Paging
              draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging-00

Abstract

   The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) does not include core
   functionality for clients to provide sorting and paging parameters
   for control of large result sets.  This omission can lead to
   unpredictable server processing of queries and client processing of
   responses.  This unpredictability can be greatly reduced if clients
   can provide servers with their preferences for managing response
   values.  This document describes RDAP query extensions that allow
   clients to specify their preferences for sorting and paging result
   sets.

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 August 5, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Loffredo, et al.         Expires August 5, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft           RDAP Sorting and Paging           February 2019

   (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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  RDAP Query Parameter Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Sorting and Paging Metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  "count" Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.3.  "sort" Parameter  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       2.3.1.  Representing Sorting Links  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     2.4.  "limit" and "offset" Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       2.4.1.  Representing Paging Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   3.  Negative Answers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   4.  RDAP Conformance  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   5.  Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.1.  Considerations about Paging Implementation  . . . . . . .  16
   6.  Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     6.1.  IIT-CNR/Registro.it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     6.2.  Google Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24

1.  Introduction

   The availability of functionality for result sorting and paging
   provides benefits to both clients and servers in the implementation
   of RESTful services [REST].  These benefits include:

   o  reducing the server response bandwidth requirements;
   o  improving server response time;
   o  improving query precision and, consequently, obtaining more
      reliable results;
   o  decreasing server query processing load;
   o  reducing client response processing time.