[regext] Signaling BCP support in EPP for
"Gould, James" Mon, 16 March 2020 14:28 UTCShow header
One question that was raised by Patrick Mevzek on the mailing list was
associated with signaling the implementation of a BCP by the server that I
believe would also apply to the client. This question applies to the two
REGEXT BCP drafts draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer and
draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces. The only existing signaling mechanism
in EPP is the use of the greeting and login services. A namespace URI could be
assigned for each BCP draft that is included as an or an in the greeting to
inform the client of the support of the BCP by the server, and in the login
command to inform the server of the support of the BCP by the client. Between
the two options, I prefer the use of the . The questions for the working group
1. Is signaling needed in EPP for the implementation of BCPs?
2. If signaling is needed:
* Will the existing signaling mechanism in EPP with the greeting and
login services meet the purpose? * Of the two service URIs and , which
is the preferred URI to use? * What URI scheme should be used?
i. One proposal is to
include bcp in the namespace,
The would be updated based
on material updates to the
BCP draft and bumped to 1.0
Please reply to the list with your feedback.