Subject: [weirds] Richard Barnes' No Objection on draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-16: (with COMMENT)

From: "Richard Barnes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:10:38 -0700

Richard Barnes has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-16: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Servers MUST return an HTTP 501 (Not Implemented) [RFC7231] response to
inform clients of unsupported queries."

Shouldn't this go in -using-http?

Also, the wording here could use tightening.  It seems like you want to
use 501 for query *types* that you don't support, vs. 404 for things
where you just don't have an answer.  So sending a query for "bbc.co.uk"
to the ".youtube" server would result in 404, but sending it to the ARIN
server might result in 501.