Marcos,
We've moved EPP discussions from this list to a new list that's being used
as we form an IETF working group to address generic protocol development. I
sent notice of this change to this list on 14 December 2000; details
describing the new list can be found here:
http://www.nsiregistry.net/maillist/rrp/200012/0000.html
We haven't yet started discussing protocol issues on the new list because
we're still working to finalize requirements. I think we're getting close
to finishing the requirements, though.
To answer your question: yes, the intended behavior is as you describe. It
certainly could be done differently, and I'm sure we'll discuss options when
we start looking closely at EPP.
<Scott/>
-----Original Message-----
From: Marcos Sanz/Denic [mailto:sanz@denic.de]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 11:37 AM
To: rrp@verisign-grs.com
Subject: [VGRS-RRP] Login rejected?
Just taking a look at draft-hollenbeck-epp-00.txt and realized that you can
send a new password along with the <login> command (section 2.6.1.1). This
could have the side effect that, if the new password cannot be accepted
(take for instance, it is too short), the login would be rejected according
to EPP atomicity. Is this a desired effect? What about an extra command for
session-management data changes?
Marcos Sanz
---------
See http://www.verisign-grs.net/maillist/rrp/
for message archives and subscription management information.
---------
See http://www.verisign-grs.net/maillist/rrp/
for message archives and subscription management information.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 12 2001 - 15:35:10 EST