Re: [EPP-discuss] Unique contact id

From: Patrik Fältström <patrik_at_frobbit.se>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 21:06:44 -0200

Why not support all of the below?

I.e. I am waiting still for registries that implement many of the alternatives that are on the table instead of all the time choosing just one (which often is not what some other registry that their registrars also access) do support.

.DK can take advantage of "being late" and support many alternatives in the cases where that is possible. Like in this case (if I have not missed any implications -- it is Friday evening after all).

  Patrik

On 2 nov 2012, at 20:51, Jørgen Thomsen <jth_at_jth.net> wrote:

> Between registries the unique contact id is handled differently in a contact create command.
>
> Some require the EPP client to generate and supply a unique identifier by generating it, testing
> it for uniqueness against the EPP system and then using it in the create command.
>
> Others will in the create contact command accept e.g. this
>
> <contact:id>auto</contact:id>
>
> or simply ignore any id supplied and generate the unique identifier for the client.
>
> with the response
>
> <resData>
> <contact:creData xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0"
> xmlns:contact="urn:ietf:params:xml:n
> s:contact-1.0" xsi:schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0 contact-1.0.xsd">
> <contact:id>JT57P</contact:id>
> <contact:crDate>2012-08-19T16:08:37.38Z</contact:crDate>
> </contact:creData>
> </resData>
>
> I prefer the latter method and want DKH to implement this.
>
>
> Venlig hilsen / Kind regards / Vennlig hilsen / Bästa hälsningar
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Met vriendelijke groeten
>
> Jørgen Thomsen
>
> jth.net ApS
> Kontaktinfo: http://jthnet.tel
>
>
>
Received on Sat Nov 03 2012 - 00:06:44 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 06 2015 - 11:39:07 CET