Subject: [weirds] WGLC review for draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query

From: Tom Harrison <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 10:47:06 +1000

The document looks good, just one issue.  Section 3.2, "Search Path
Segment Specification", has:

    A simple search to determine if an object exists (or not) without
    returning RDAP-encoded results can be performed using the HTTP
    HEAD method as described in Section 4.1 of
    [I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http].  Detailed results can be retrieved
    using the path segments specified here.

I think the last sentence should become "Detailed results can be
retrieved using the HTTP GET method", since the same path segments
will be used regardless of the request method.

-Tom

---

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:50:11 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: weirds [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Tom Harrison
> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 8:47 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [weirds] WGLC review for draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query
> 

I see your point, but there's more to it than just the GET method. You also need the path segments. How about this?

"Detailed results can be retrieved using the HTTP GET method and the path segments specified here."

Scott

---

From: Tom Harrison <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 08:25:55 +1000

On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 12:50:11PM +0000, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>     A simple search to determine if an object exists (or not)
>>     without returning RDAP-encoded results can be performed using
>>     the HTTP HEAD method as described in Section 4.1 of
>>     [I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http].  Detailed results can be
>>     retrieved using the path segments specified here.
>> 
> I see your point, but there's more to it than just the GET method.
> You also need the path segments. How about this?
> 

The reference to path segments in the second sentence still reads to
me like those segments are somehow specific to the GET request.  What
about moving the paragraph to the end of 3.2?  That would avoid any
problems with context, I think.

-Tom

---

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 10:54:00 +0000

> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 6:26 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [weirds] WGLC review for draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query
> 

Sure, that's doable.

Scott