Registration Protocols Extensions M. Loffredo Internet-Draft IIT-CNR/Registro.it Intended status: Standards Track G. Brown Expires: 30 May 2022 CentralNic Group plc 26 November 2021 Using JSContact in Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) JSON Responses draft-ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact-04 Abstract This document describes an RDAP extension which represents entity contact information in JSON responses using JSContact. 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 30 May 2022. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2021 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 (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. Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. JSContact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Using JSCard objects in RDAP Responses . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. RDAP Query Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. Transition Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. RDAP Features Supporting a Transition Process . . . . . . 10 4.1.1. Notices and Link Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1.2. rdapConformance Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.1.3. Query Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2. Transition Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2.1. Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2.2. Transition Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2.2.1. Stage 1: only jCard provided . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.2.2.2. Stage 2: jCard sunset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.2.2.3. Stage 3: jCard deprecation . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.2.2.4. Stage 4: jCard deprecated . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.2.2.5. Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.2. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Client . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5.3. client.rdap.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5.4. CentralNic Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 A.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 A.3. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 A.4. Change from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.5. Initial WG version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.6. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.7. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.8. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A.9. Change from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 1. Introduction This document specifies an extension to the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) that allows RDAP servers to use JSContact ([I-D.ietf-jmap-jscontact]) to represent the contact information associated with entities in RDAP responses, instead of jCard ([RFC7095]). It also describes the process by which an RDAP server can transition from jCard to JSContact. RDAP query and response extensions are defined to facilitate the transition process. 1.1. Rationale According to the feedback from RDAP Pilot Working Group ([RDAP-PILOT-WG], a group of RDAP server implementers representing registries and registrars of generic TLDs), the most commonly raised implementation concern, for both servers and client implementers, related to the use of jCard ([RFC7095]) to represent the contact information associated with entities. Working Group members reported jCard to be unintuitive, complicated to implement for both clients and servers, and incompatible with best practices for RESTful APIs. JSContact ([I-D.ietf-jmap-jscontact]) provides a simpler and more efficient representation for contact information with regard to time and effort saved in processing it. In addition, similarly to jCard, it provides a means to represent internationalised and unstructured contact information. Support for internationalised contact information has been recognised being necessary to facilitate the future internationalisation of registration data directory services. 1.2. 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. JSContact The JSContact specification defines a data model and JSON representation of contact information that can be used for data storage and exchange in address book or directory applications. It aims to be an alternative to the vCard data format ([RFC6350]) and to be unambiguous, extendable and simple to process. In contrast with jCard, it is not a direct mapping from the vCard data model and expands semantics where appropriate. Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 The JSContact specification declares two main object types: "Card", which represents a single contact card, and "CardGroup" which represents a collection of Card objects. For the purpose of this document, only Card objects are considered. To avoid confusion, in the following of this document, the term "JSCard" is used to refer to "JSContact Card". JSCard differs from jCard in that it: * follows an object-oriented rather than array-oriented approach; * is simple to process; * requires no extra work in serialization/deserialization from/to a data model; * includes no "jagged" arrays; * prefers maps rather than arrays to implement collections. [I-D.ietf-jmap-jscontact-vcard] provides informational guidance on the conversion of jCard into JSCard, and vice versa. 3. Using JSCard objects in RDAP Responses Entity objects in RDAP responses MAY include a "jscard" property whose value is a JSCard object instead of the "vCardArray" property defined in [RFC9083]. Servers returning the "jscard" property in their response MUST include "jscard_0" in the "rdapConformance" array. The JSCard "uid" property SHOULD contain the same value as the RDAP "handle" property. Since most of the JSCard collections are represented as maps, map keys must be defined. To aid interoperability, RDAP providers are RECOMMENDED to use as map keys the following string values and labels defined in [RFC5733]: * "org" in the "organizations" map when there is a single element. If both internationalised and localized forms exist, the key MUST be used for the internationalised form; * "addr" in the "addresses" map when there is a single element. If both internationalised and localized forms exist, the key MUST be used for the internationalised form; Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 * "email" in the "emails" map for the element; * "voice" in the "phones" map for the element; * "fax" in the "phones" map for the element. If present, the localized version of name, organization and postal address MUST be inserted into the "localizations" map. The following is an elided example of an RDAP entity including a JSCard object that presents the "localizations" map (See PDF for non-ASCII character string). ... "jscard": { "@type" : "Card", "uid" : "7e0636f5-e48f-4a32-ab96-b57e9c07c7aa", "fullName" : "Vasya Pupkin", "organizations" : { "org" : { "@type" : "Organization", "name" : "My Company" } }, "addresses" : { "addr" : { "@type" : "Address", "street" : [ { "@type" : "StreetComponent", "type" : "name", "value" : "1 Street" }, { "@type" : "StreetComponent", "type" : "postOfficeBox", "value" : "01001" } ], "locality" : "Kyiv", "countryCode" : "UA" } }, "localizations" : { "uk" : { "addresses/addr" : { "@type" : "Address", "street" : [ { "@type" : "StreetComponent", "type" : "name", "value" : "1, Улица" }, { Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 "@type" : "StreetComponent", "type" : "postOfficeBox", "value" : "01001" } ], "locality" : "Киев", "countryCode" : "UA" }, "fullName" : "Вася Пупкин", "organizations/org" : { "@type" : "Organization", "name" : "Моя Компания" } } } } ... Figure 1: Example of handling localizations in JSContact Implementers MAY use different mapping schemes to define keys for additional entries of the aforementioned maps or others. For example, a mapping scheme may consist in using a trivial sequential number (e.g. "url-1", "url-2", etc.) The following is an example of an RDAP entity including a JSCard object that has been converted from the example in section 5.1 of [RFC9083]. { "rdapConformance": [ "rdap_level_0", "jscard_0" ], "objectClassName" : "entity", "handle":"XXXX", "jscard":{ "@type": "Card", "uid": "XXXX", "fullName": "Joe User" , "name": [ { "@type": "NameComponent", "type": "surname", "value": "User" }, { "@type": "NameComponent", "type": "personal", Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 "value": "Joe" }, { "@type": "NameComponent", "type": "suffix", "value": "ing. jr" }, { "@type": "NameComponent", "type": "suffix", "value": "M.Sc." } ], "kind": "individual", "preferredContactLanguages": { "fr": { "@type": "ContactLanguage", "pref": 1 }, "en": { "@type": "ContactLanguage", "pref": 2 } }, "organizations": { "org": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "Example" } }, "titles": { "title": { "@type": "Title", "title": "Research Scientist" }, "role": { "@type": "Title", "title": "Project Lead" } }, "addresses": { "addr": { "@type": "Address", "contexts": { "work": true }, "street": [ { Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 "@type": "StreetComponent", "type": "name", "value": "4321 Rue Somewhere" }, { "@type": "StreetComponent", "type": "extension", "value": "Suite 1234" } ], "locality": "Quebec", "region": "QC", "postcode": "G1V 2M2", "country": "Canada", "coordinates": "geo:46.772673,-71.282945", "timeZone": "Etc/GMT+5" }, "home": { "@type": "Address", "contexts": { "private": true }, "fullAddress": "123 Maple Ave\nSuite 90001\nVancouver\nBC\n1239\n" } }, "phones": { "voice" : { "@type": "Phone", "contexts": { "work": true }, "features": { "voice": true, "cell": true, "video": true, "text": true }, "pref": 1, "phone": "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102" } }, "emails": { "email": { "@type": "EmailAddress", "contexts": { "work": true }, "email": "joe.user@example.com" Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 } }, "online": { "key": { "@type" : "Resource", "contexts": { "work": true }, "type": "uri", "label": "key", "resource": "http://www.example.com/joe.user/joe.asc" }, "url": { "@type" : "Resource", "contexts": { "private": true }, "type": "uri", "label": "url", "resource": "http://example.org" } } }, "roles":[ "registrar" ], "publicIds":[ { "type":"IANA Registrar ID", "identifier":"1" } ], "remarks":[ { "description":[ "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.", "Originally written by Terry Sullivan." ] } ], "links":[ { "value":"http://example.com/entity/XXXX", "rel":"self", "href":"http://example.com/entity/XXXX", "type" : "application/rdap+json" } ], "events":[ { Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 "eventAction":"registration", "eventDate":"1990-12-31T23:59:59Z" } ], "asEventActor":[ { "eventAction":"last changed", "eventDate":"1991-12-31T23:59:59Z" } ] } Figure 2: Example of using JSContact in RDAP response 3.1. RDAP Query Parameters Two new query parameters are defined for the purpose of this document. The query parameters are OPTIONAL extensions of path segments defined in [RFC9082]. They are as follows: * "jscard": a boolean value that allows a client to request the "jscard" property in the RDAP response; * "jcard": a boolean value that allows a client to request the "vcardArray" property in the RDAP response. These parameters are furtherly explained in Section 4. 4. Transition Considerations 4.1. RDAP Features Supporting a Transition Process 4.1.1. Notices and Link Relationships RDAP allows servers to communicate service information to clients through notices. An RDAP response may contain one or more notice objects ([RFC9083], Section 4.3), each of which may include a set of link objects, which can be used to provide clients with references and documentation. These link objects may have a "rel" property which defines the relationship type, as described in [RFC8288], Section 4. The transition process outlined in this document uses two types of link relation: * "deprecation", as described in [I-D.ietf-httpapi-deprecation-header]; Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 * "alternate", as described in [RFC8288]. 4.1.2. rdapConformance Property The information about the specifications used in the construction of the response is also described by the strings which appear in the "rdapConformance" property of the RDAP response. 4.1.3. Query Parameters Clients are able to ask servers to use the query parameters defined in Section 3.1 in accordance with [RFC9082]. 4.2. Transition Procedure The principles of the procedure for jCard to JSCard transition are based on the best practices in [API-DEPRECATION]. The procedure consists of four contiguous stages. During the procedure, the presence of "jscard_0" tag in the rdapConformance array indicates that JSCard is returned instead of jCard. The date and time format used to notify clients about the stages of this procedure is defined in [RFC3339]. 4.2.1. Goals The procedure described in this document aims to achieve the following goals: * only one contact representation would be included in the response; * the response would always be compliant to [RFC9083] because: - being the "jscard" property a response extension, its presence would be signaled by the "jscard_0" conformance tag; - being "vcardArray" property optional in a response, its absence would be allowed; * clients would be informed about the transition timeline; * the backward compatibility would be guaranteed throughout the transition; * servers and clients could execute their transitions independently. 4.2.2. Transition Stages Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 11] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 4.2.2.1. Stage 1: only jCard provided This stage corresponds to providing jCard as default contact card ([RFC9083]). The RDAP server is not able to provide an alternate contact card. The rdapConformance array MUST NOT contain the "jscard_0" tag. 4.2.2.2. Stage 2: jCard sunset During this stage, the server uses jCard by default, but the RDAP server will return JSCard if the client sets the query parameter "jscard" to 1/true/yes. The rdapConformance array MUST contain the "jscard_0" tag if JSCard is requested. The RDAP server SHOULD include a notice titled "jCard sunset end". Such a notice should include a description reporting the jCard sunset end date and time and two links: * "deprecation": a link to a URI-identified resource documenting the jCard deprecation; * "alternate": if JSCard is not requested, a link to the JSCard version of same resource as identified by the current query string plus the parameter "jscard" set to 1/true/yes (Figure 3); otherwise, only the "deprecation" link is provided (Figure 4). "notices": [ { "title": "jCard sunset end", "description": ["2022-07-01T00:00:00Z"], "links": [{ "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX", "rel": "deprecation", "type": "text/html", "href": "http://www.example.com/jcard_deprecation.html" }, { "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX", "rel": "alternate", "type": "application/rdap+json", "href": " http://example.net/entity/XXXX?jscard=1" } ] } ] Figure 3: jCard sunset - JSCard not requested Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 12] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 "notices": [ { "title": "jCard sunset end", "description": ["2022-07-01T00:00:00Z"], "links": [ { "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX?jscard=1", "rel": "deprecation", "type": "text/html", "href": "http://www.example.com/jcard_deprecation.html" } ] } ] Figure 4: jCard sunset - JSCard requested 4.2.2.3. Stage 3: jCard deprecation This stage corresponds to the provisioning of JSCard by default, but the RDAP will return jCard if the client sets the query parameter "jcard" to 1/true/yes. The rdapConformance array contains the "jscard_0" tag unless jCard is requested. The "jscard" query parameter is ignored. The RDAP server SHOULD to return a notice titled "jCard deprecation end". Such a notice should include a description reporting the jCard deprecation end date and time and two links: * "deprecation": a link to a URI-identified resource documenting the jCard deprecation; * "alternate": if jCard is not requested, a link to the jCard version of the same resource as identified by the current query string plus the parameter "jcard" set to 1/true/yes (Figure 5); otherwise, a link to the JSCard version of the same resource as identified by the current query string without the parameter "jcard" (Figure 6). Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 13] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 "notices": [ { "title": "jCard deprecation end", "description": ["2022-12-31T23:59:59Z"], "links": [ { "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX", "rel": "deprecation", "type": "text/html", "href": "http://www.example.com/jcard_deprecation.html" }, { "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX", "rel": "alternate", "type": "application/rdap+json", "href": " http://example.net/entity/XXXX?jcard=1" } ] } ] Figure 5: jCard deprecation - jCard not requested "notices": [ { "title": "jCard deprecation end", "description": ["2022-12-31T23:59:59Z"], "links": [ { "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX?jcard=1", "rel": "deprecation", "type": "text/html", "href": "http://www.example.com/jcard_deprecation.html" }, { "value": "http://example.net/entity/XXXX?jcard=1", "rel": "alternate", "type": "application/rdap+json", "href": " http://example.net/entity/XXXX" } ] } ] Figure 6: jCard deprecation - jCard requested Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 14] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 4.2.2.4. Stage 4: jCard deprecated This stage corresponds to providing JSCard as default contact card. The RDAP server is not able to provide an alternate contact card. The rdapConformance array always contains "jscard_0" tag. The RDAP server doesn't include any notice about the jCard deprecation process. Both "jscard" and "jcard" query parameters are ignored. 4.2.2.5. Length The length of both jCard sunset and jCard deprecation periods are not fixed by this specification. Best practices in REST API deprecation suggest that, depending on the deprecated API's reach, user base and service offering, a convenient time could be anywhere between 3 - 8 months. Anyway, RDAP providers are RECOMMENDED to monitor the server log to figure out whether declared times need to be changed to meet client requirements. 5. 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 RFC 7942 [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". 5.1. IIT-CNR/Registro.it RDAP Server * Responsible Organization: Institute of Informatics and Telematics of National Research Council (IIT-CNR)/Registro.it Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 15] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 * Location: https://rdap.pubtest.nic.it/ * Description: This implementation includes support for RDAP queries using data from the public test environment of .it ccTLD. * 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 5.2. 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/ * 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. RDAP responses containing JSCard objects are handled identically to those containing jCard objects. Raw versions of RDAP responses including either jCard or JSCard objects are provided. * 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 5.3. client.rdap.org * Location: https://client.rdap.org/ * Description: This is a web-based "single page" RDAP client. RDAP responses are retrieved from RDAP servers by the browser, and parsed into an HTML representation. RDAP responses containing JSCard objects are handled identically to those containing jCard objects. * Level of Maturity: This is an "alpha" test implementation. * Coverage: This implementation implements client support for parsing JSCard objects in RDAP responses. Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 16] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 * Contact Information: Gavin Brown, feedback@rdap.org 5.4. CentralNic Registry * Responsible Organization: CentralNic Group PLC * Location: https://rdap.centralnic.com/{tld} * Description: This server is the product RDAP service for all top- level domains on the CentralNic registry platform. * Level of Maturity: Production quality. * Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features described in this specification. * Contact Information: support@centralnic.com 6. IANA Considerations IANA is requested to register the following values in the RDAP Extensions Registry: * Extension identifier: jscard_0 * Registry operator: Any * Published specification: This document. * Contact: IETF * Intended usage: This extension represents a contact card provided in an RDAP response according to the JSContact specification ([I-D.ietf-jmap-jscontact]). 7. Security Considerations Unlike jCard, the formatted name as well as any other personally identifiable information is not required in JSCard. The only mandatory property, namely "uid", is not a sensitive information as it happens, instead, for the "fn" property in jCard. Therefore, redacted properties can be merely excluded without using placeholder values. This means that, with reference to what is described in [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-redacted], only the "Removal" method can be used for redacting JSContact properties whereas the "Empty Value" is also used for redacting jCard. Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 17] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 8. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to this document: Jasdip Singh and Francesco Donini. 9. References 9.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC3339] Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002, . [RFC5733] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Contact Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5733, DOI 10.17487/RFC5733, August 2009, . [RFC6350] Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350, DOI 10.17487/RFC6350, August 2011, . [RFC7095] Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095, DOI 10.17487/RFC7095, January 2014, . [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, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . [RFC8288] Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 8288, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017, . [RFC9082] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082, DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, June 2021, . Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 18] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 [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, . 9.2. Informative References [API-DEPRECATION] Sandoval, K., "How to Smartly Sunset and Deprecate APIs", August 2019, . [I-D.ietf-httpapi-deprecation-header] Dalal, S. and E. Wilde, "The Deprecation HTTP Header Field", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf- httpapi-deprecation-header-02, 10 July 2021, . [I-D.ietf-jmap-jscontact] Stepanek, R. and M. Loffredo, "JSContact: A JSON representation of contact data", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-jmap-jscontact-08, 20 October 2021, . [I-D.ietf-jmap-jscontact-vcard] Loffredo, M. and R. Stepanek, "JSContact: Converting from and to vCard", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- ietf-jmap-jscontact-vcard-07, 20 October 2021, . [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-redacted] Gould, J., Smith, D., Kolker, J., and R. Carney, "Redacted Fields in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Response", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf- regext-rdap-redacted-02, 18 November 2021, . [RDAP-PILOT-WG] ICANN RDAP Pilot WG, "RDAP Pilot Report", April 2019, . Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 19] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 Appendix A. Change Log A.1. Change from 00 to 01 1. Changed category from "Best Current Practice" to "Standards Track" 2. Replaced the example of Figure 2 3. Changed the title of the "Migration from JCard to JSCard" section to "Transition Considerations" 4. Added Section 3.1 5. Updated Section 6 6. Updated Section 7 7. Rearranged the description of stage 1 in Section 4.2.2 8. Changed the names of the transition stages 1 and 2 9. Corrected Figure 3, Figure 5, Figure 6 10. Changed the rdapConformance tag "jscard_level_0" to "jscard" 11. Removed the "Best Practices for deprecating a REST API features" section, but added a useful reference. A.2. Change from 01 to 02 1. Removed the sentence "which cannot be represented using jCard" in Section 1.1. A.3. Change from 02 to 03 1. Updated section "Conventions Used in This Document". 2. Updated the contact in "IANA Considerations" section. 3. Changed the reference draft-loffredo-jmap-jscontact-vcard to draft-ietf-jmap-jscontact-vcard. 4. Added reference to RFC8174. 5. Other minor edits. Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 20] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 A.4. Change from 03 to 04 1. Updated the reference draft-dalal-deprecation-header to draft- ietf-httpapi-deprecation-header. A.5. Initial WG version 1. Ported from draft-loffredo-regext-rdap-jcard-deprecation-04 renamed to draft-ietf-regext-rdap-jscontact-00. A.6. Change from 00 to 01 1. Updated Section 3 and Figure 2. A.7. Change from 01 to 02 1. Updated Section 2 and Figure 2. A.8. Change from 02 to 03 1. Replaced references to obsolete RFC7482 and RFC7483 with RFC9082 and RFC9083. 2. Updated Section 3 and Figure 2. A.9. Change from 03 to 04 1. Changed the references to Internet Drafts. 2. Added an example showing how localizations are treated in JSContact. 3. Changed the position of section "Goals" in Section 4.2. 4. Added three more implementations to Section 5. 5. Changed the rdapConformance tag "jscard" to "jscard_0" 6. Added clarifications addressing the feedback provided by Jasdip Singh about version -03. 7. Added Section 8. 8. Other minor edits. Authors' Addresses Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 21] Internet-Draft Using JSContact in RDAP November 2021 Mario Loffredo IIT-CNR/Registro.it Via Moruzzi,1 56124 Pisa Italy Email: mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it URI: http://www.iit.cnr.it Gavin Brown CentralNic Group plc Saddlers House, 44 Gutter Lane London EC2V 6BR United Kingdom Phone: +44 20 33 88 0600 Email: gavin.brown@centralnic.com URI: https://www.centralnic.com Loffredo & Brown Expires 30 May 2022 [Page 22]