Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: ietf-not43@lists.verisignlabs.com
To Subscribe: ietf-not43-request@lists.verisignlabs.com
In Body: subscribe
Archive: https://lists.verisignlabs.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-not43
Description of Working Group:
In the standard operation of Internet systems, various
labels and data are managed globally -- domain names, IPv4
and IPv6 addresses, etc. From time to time, for operational
and administrative purposes, users of the Internet need to
be able to find and access registered information associated with
those labels.
The CRISP (Cross-Registry Information Service Protocol) WG will
define a standard mechanism that can be used for finding
authoritative information associated with a label, a protocol
to transport queries and responses for accessing that information,
and a first profile (schema & queries) to support commonly-required
queries for domain registration information. Backwards compatibility
with existing administrative directory services such as WHOIS is not a
goal of this effort. Provisioning of data into registry or registrar
systems is likewise out of scope -- CRISP provides a uniform
access to and view of data that may be held in disparate backend
servers. While the framework created will hopefully be sufficiently
flexible to allow re-use by other registries/services with related
design criteria, those uses will be deferred to the creation of
appropriate schema & query profiles at some future date.
The CRISP service definition will define:
o a standard mechanism that can be used to determine the
authoritative server(s) for information about a given label
o a single mandatory to implement protocol for transporting
application queries and responses, including
o expression of input query
o expression of result sets
o standard expression of error conditions
o authentication and verification of data integrity
o specific data types and queries to be supported in the first
supported registry service: a global service for domain registration
information access
Deliverables:
o Finalized requirements document for the CRISP service
o Document specifying a new protocol, or the use of an existing one,
for providing CRISP service (application transport).
o Document specifying required schema elements and queries for domain
registration administrative directory queries.
Input documents:
draft-newton-ir-dir-requirements-*
draft-newton-iris*
draft-hall-ldap-whois*
Goals and Milestones:
Oct 02 | | Submit requirements document as an Informational RFC |
Nov 02 | | Submit first draft of protocol (use) specification |
Nov 02 | | Submit first draft of domain registration administrative
directory services required schema element specification. |
Apr 03 | | Submit revised protocol (use) specification document as
Proposed Standard |
Apr 03 | | Submit revised draft of domain registration administrative
directory services required schema element specification as
Proposed Standard. |
Internet-Drafts:
- draft-ietf-crisp-requirements-06.txt
- draft-ietf-crisp-iris-dreg-04.txt
- draft-ietf-crisp-iris-core-04.txt
- draft-ietf-crisp-iris-beep-04.txt
- draft-ietf-crisp-iris-areg-04.txt
- draft-ietf-crisp-internet-resource-number-req-00.txt
No Request For Comments
Current Meeting Report
Cross Registry Information Service Protocol WG (crisp)
Wednesday, November 12 at 1300-1500
CHAIRS: April Marine
George Michaelson
Scribe: Cathy Murphy
[These notes are a summary done by April and George based on Cathy's
excellent detailed notes. The detailed notes were sent to the list.
Comments like this one that are added to summarize or clarify are in
square brackets so their origin is clear.]
Name Abbreviations:
AM April Marine
AN Andy Newton
CA Chris Ambler
CM Cathy Murphy
EL Ed Lewis
FN Frederico Neves
GGM George Michaelson
GL Ginny Listman
JK John Klensin
LD Leslie Daigle
MK Mark Kosters
MS Marco Sanz
RS Richard Shockey
TH Ted Hardie
WM Bill Manning
+-----+
o Welcome and Agenda Bashing - chairs
AM:
- Welcome new co-chair, George Michaelson
- Ted Hardie (now sheparding AD) was wearing too many hats
- Scribe is Cathy Murphy
- Anyone to do jabber log? Ted volunteers.
- Mail list (currently at
ietf-not43@verisignlabs.com) will be moving to IETF servers
- No agenda changes
Since last meeting, group came to consensus on IRIS as way forward. Reqts
draft in RFC editor queue; some recent comments, but done and not
re-opening.
+-----+
o Outstanding IRIS Issues - Andy Newton
AN: These are not the issues sent to mailing list; these have come
forward since then. List items can be found in mail archives.
AM: What's the next step?
AN: Send to list and see who comments.
AM: Andy has asked for a co-author for the IRIS documents (for XML)?
... no volunteers...
[Note from April: Later Marcos Sanz agreed to co-edit]
+-----+
o Additional Requirements? - Ginny Listman
re:
draft-ietf-crisp-internet-resource-num
ber-requirements-00.txt
AM: Are you still willing to be point person for this document?
GL: Shane Kerr has agreed to be the editor going forward.
[Discussion of best way to move these requirements forward given that we
already have a draft req doc in RFC Editor queue. Decision is to do a
"bis" or update of the original req doc, one that totally replaces the
first req doc so as to capture all the requirements in one place.]
+-----+
o IRIS lightweight transport - Andy Newton
AN: Recently, some discussion about transports on the list. It was
brought up before a while back, but is was probably premature to discuss at
that time. Now seems like a good time to discuss this.
[Presentaiton and discussion of the possibility of adding UDP as one of the
IRIS transports.]
GGM: Feel strongly that if it going to proceed, should be done here.
TH: Agree. What is going to get people to move? Will IRIS-light get
people to move? But if what is defined is so similar to whois-like, then
worry that will discourage moving.
AN: Agree with that concern, that if we proceed to UDP, won't ever get to
BEEP. But all the other drivers (int'lzation, etc) still will require
BEEP.
RS: Is any one clamoring for this?
AC: Yes, registrars are.
AM: Would like to take it to the list. [as to whether there is enough
demand to see if WG would add it as a work item]
+-----+
o Update Charter and Milestones
Is there agreement on the change to the charter language that allows
number resources to be included?
...Sense of the room was YES...
Revised Milestones proposed
[will send revised charter and milestons to the list--some small changes in
milestones from previous msg to the list]
+-----+
o Using dreg for registrar-registrar - Chris Ambler
communication
CA: Several of aspects of IRIS are to limit queuing due to mining. This
works to the detriment of registrars. What we need is a very
light-weight registar-to-registrar query mechanism. So, looking to
implement in a number of ways. One idea was to just add a flag in port 43 so
that would send back XML . Do we want to proceed with full blown CRISP?
Probably, but am approaching now just to do as a light-weight
implementation.
|
Slides
IRIS Open Issues
IRIS and Application Transports
Whats In a Number?