|
Hi Deborah In general I would caution against following
the DNS model blindly, so to answer your question I would say yes. On a more general note, is there a preliminary
model I can view? Are you referring to the ESPP one? If so, I have some
comments relating to the data model. Is this the forum for that or is it
premature to raise my issues? David From:
drinks-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Guyton, Deborah A The
protocol design team has been working on a data model and protocol for the
registry provisioning interface. We
have associated with each public identifier routing information in the form of
resolution answers on the name server. Initially we looked at specific
types of routing info – such as NS and NAPTR Resource Records. We have
heard feedback that this is too DNS-centric. We are discussing collapsing these
into a “generic” Route Object. This may lead to a long set of
attributes, one would be route type, but many others would be optional and may
only apply to a given route type. We
would appreciate some feedback –does it make sense to collapse into a
generic Route Object? Other suggestions are welcome. Thank
you. Please reply to the list. |
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.