Subject: [weirds] rdap-query and .well-known

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:41:47 +0000

Since the discussion on search text seems to be winding down I wanted to revisit what I think is the last bit of "are we sure?" text in rdap-query-08: the well known URL text. I've cc'd Mark Nottingham in the hope of continuing to discussion that stopped with these messages from John and Simon:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/weirds/current/msg03387.html

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/weirds/current/msg03390.html

Mark, some additional guidance on the need for this approach would be helpful.

Scott

---

From: Marc Blanchet <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 13:48:40 -0500

since then, the bootstrap draft has received positive feedback and is at the tail of the wg last call to be accepted. So unless issues are raised, the current bootstrap approach means that the bootstrap will provide a full url to the client. Therefore, we may not need the well-known approach.

Marc.

Le 2013-12-18 à 13:41, Hollenbeck, Scott <[email-masked]> a écrit :

> _______________________________________________
> weirds mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds

---

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:42:12 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Blanchet [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 1:49 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: [email-masked]; Mark Nottingham ([email-masked])
> Subject: Re: [weirds] rdap-query and .well-known
> 
> since then, the bootstrap draft has received positive feedback and is
> at the tail of the wg last call to be accepted. So unless issues are
> raised, the current bootstrap approach means that the bootstrap will
> provide a full url to the client. Therefore, we may not need the well-
> known approach.

I'd feel better about this if we could bootstrap *all* queries - but we can't. Unstructured entity names and search patterns pose a particular challenge.

Scott

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 19 Dec 2013 13:40:05 -0000

>I'd feel better about this if we could bootstrap *all* queries - but we can't.
>Unstructured entity names and search patterns pose a particular challenge.

For unstructured entity names, you can only look them up, with or
without a bootstrap, if you know what provider defined it.  For names
you got from a previous lookup, I think we should add a field to the
JSON that tells you where to look up the entities.  For names you got
somewhere else, you basically have to look up the name or IP or ASN
it's describing, and then ask whatever server answered that question.

Search patterns are almost easy.  If you're searching for blah*.tld,
you use the bootstrap for the TLD.  If you're searching for
blah*.ac.uk, you uh, well, hmmn.

R's,
John

---

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:44:44 +0000

> From: John Levine [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 8:40 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott

I was thinking about domain search patterns like example*. Point is that bootstrapping has some limitations.

Scott

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 09:09:01 -0500

> blah*.ac.uk, you uh, well, hmmn.

If only we had a global, widely-available service that allowed one to
publish information about services at a name.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 19 Dec 2013 15:33:24 -0000

>publish information about services at a name.

Except that this is the converse, we want to know what names have a
service, a question that the DNS specifically doesn't address.

R's,
John