draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-04.txt   rfc9083.txt 
REGEXT Working Group S. Hollenbeck Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Hollenbeck
Internet-Draft Verisign Labs Request for Comments: 9083 Verisign Labs
Intended status: Standards Track A. Newton STD: 95 A. Newton
Expires: 24 April 2021 AWS Obsoletes: 7483 AWS
21 October 2020 Category: Standards Track June 2021
ISSN: 2070-1721
JSON Responses for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) JSON Responses for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)
draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-04
Abstract Abstract
This document describes JSON data structures representing This document describes JSON data structures representing
registration information maintained by Regional Internet Registries registration information maintained by Regional Internet Registries
(RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs). These data structures are (RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs). These data structures are
used to form Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) query used to form Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) query
responses. responses. This document obsoletes RFC 7483.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on 24 April 2021. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9083.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights publication of this document. Please review these documents
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction
1.1. Terminology and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Terminology and Definitions
1.2. Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Data Model
2. Use of JSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Use of JSON
2.1. Naming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Naming
3. Common Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Common Data Types
4. Common Data Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Common Data Structures
4.1. RDAP Conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1. RDAP Conformance
4.2. Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2. Links
4.3. Notices and Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3. Notices and Remarks
4.4. Language Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.4. Language Identifier
4.5. Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.5. Events
4.6. Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.6. Status
4.7. Port 43 WHOIS Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.7. Port 43 WHOIS Server
4.8. Public IDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.8. Public IDs
4.9. Object Class Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.9. Object Class Name
4.10. An Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.10. An Example
5. Object Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5. Object Classes
5.1. The Entity Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 5.1. The Entity Object Class
5.2. The Nameserver Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 5.2. The Nameserver Object Class
5.3. The Domain Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 5.3. The Domain Object Class
5.4. The IP Network Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 5.4. The IP Network Object Class
5.5. The Autonomous System Number Object Class . . . . . . . . 43 5.5. The Autonomous System Number Object Class
6. Error Response Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 6. Error Response Body
7. Responding to Help Queries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 7. Responding to Help Queries
8. Responding To Searches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 8. Responding To Searches
9. Indicating Truncated Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 9. Indicating Truncated Responses
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 10. IANA Considerations
10.1. RDAP JSON Media Type Registration . . . . . . . . . . . 52 10.1. RDAP JSON Media Type Registration
10.2. JSON Values Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 10.2. JSON Values Registry
10.2.1. Notice and Remark Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 10.2.1. Notice and Remark Types
10.2.2. Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 10.2.2. Status
10.2.3. Event Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 10.2.3. Event Actions
10.2.4. Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 10.2.4. Roles
10.2.5. Variant Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 10.2.5. Variant Relations
11. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 11. Security Considerations
11.1. RedDog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 12. Internationalization Considerations
11.2. Verisign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 12.1. Character Encoding
11.3. Verisign Labs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 12.2. URIs and IRIs
11.4. Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) . . . . 68 12.3. Language Tags
12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 12.4. Internationalized Domain Names
13. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 13. Privacy Considerations
13.1. Character Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 14. References
13.2. URIs and IRIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 14.1. Normative References
13.3. Language Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 14.2. Informative References
13.4. Internationalized Domain Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Appendix A. Suggested Data Modeling with the Entity Object Class
A.1. Registrants and Contacts
14. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 A.2. Registrars
15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Appendix B. Modeling Events
15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Appendix C. Structured vs. Unstructured Addresses
15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Appendix D. Secure DNS
Appendix A. Suggested Data Modeling with the Entity Object Appendix E. Motivations for Using JSON
Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Appendix F. Changes from RFC 7483
A.1. Registrants and Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Acknowledgments
A.2. Registrars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Authors' Addresses
Appendix B. Modeling Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Appendix C. Structured vs. Unstructured Addresses . . . . . . . 79
Appendix D. Secure DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Appendix E. Motivations for Using JSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Changes from RFC 7483 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes responses in the JSON [RFC8259] format for This document describes responses in the JSON [RFC8259] format for
the queries as defined by the Registration Data Access Protocol Query the queries as defined by the Registration Data Access Protocol Query
Format [I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis]. A communication protocol for Format [RFC9082]. A communication protocol for exchanging queries
exchanging queries and responses is described in [RFC7480]. and responses is described in [RFC7480]. This document obsoletes RFC
7483.
1.1. Terminology and Definitions 1.1. Terminology and Definitions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] when "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
specified in their uppercase forms. BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
The following list describes terminology and definitions used The following list describes terminology and definitions used
throughout this document: throughout this document:
DNR: Domain Name Registry or Domain Name Registrar DNR: Domain Name Registry or Domain Name Registrar
LDH: letters, digits, hyphen LDH: letters, digits, hyphen
member: data found within an object as defined by JSON [RFC8259] member: data found within an object as defined by JSON [RFC8259]
skipping to change at page 7, line 36 skipping to change at line 302
may be used to specifically reference an object may be used to specifically reference an object
instance. The semantics of this data type as found instance. The semantics of this data type as found
in this document are to be a registry-unique in this document are to be a registry-unique
reference to the closest enclosing object where the reference to the closest enclosing object where the
value is found. The data type names "registryId", value is found. The data type names "registryId",
"roid", "nic-handle", "registrationNo", etc., are "roid", "nic-handle", "registrationNo", etc., are
terms often synonymous with this data type. In terms often synonymous with this data type. In
this document, the term "handle" is used. The term this document, the term "handle" is used. The term
exposed to users by clients is a presentation issue exposed to users by clients is a presentation issue
beyond the scope of this document. This value is a beyond the scope of this document. This value is a
simple string. simple character string.
IPv4 addresses: The representation of IPv4 addresses in this IPv4 addresses: The representation of IPv4 addresses in this
document uses the dotted-decimal notation. An document uses the dotted-decimal notation. An
example of this textual representation is example of this textual representation is
"192.0.2.0". "192.0.2.0".
IPv6 addresses: The representation of IPv6 addresses in this IPv6 addresses: The representation of IPv6 addresses in this
document follow the forms outlined in [RFC5952]. document follow the forms outlined in [RFC5952].
An example of this textual representation is An example of this textual representation is
"2001:db8::1:0:0:1". "2001:db8::1:0:0:1".
country codes: Where the identity of a geopolitical nation or country codes: Where the identity of a geopolitical nation or
country is needed, these identities are represented country is needed, these identities are represented
with the alpha-2 or two-character country code with the alpha-2 or two-character country code
designation as defined in [ISO.3166.1988]. The designation as defined in [ISO.3166.2020]. The
alpha-2 representation is used because it is freely alpha-2 representation is used because it is freely
available, whereas the alpha-3 and numeric-3 available, whereas the alpha-3 and numeric-3
standards are not. standards are not.
LDH names: Textual representations of DNS names where the LDH names: Textual representations of DNS names where the
labels of the domain are all "letters, digits, labels of the domain are all "letters, digits,
hyphen" labels as described by [RFC5890]. Trailing hyphen" labels as described by [RFC5890]. Trailing
periods are optional. periods are optional.
Unicode names: Textual representations of DNS names where one or Unicode names: Textual representations of DNS names where one or
skipping to change at page 8, line 28 skipping to change at line 339
[RFC5890]. Trailing periods are optional. [RFC5890]. Trailing periods are optional.
dates and times: The syntax for values denoting dates and times is dates and times: The syntax for values denoting dates and times is
defined in [RFC3339]. defined in [RFC3339].
URIs: The syntax for values denoting a Uniform Resource URIs: The syntax for values denoting a Uniform Resource
Identifier (URI) is defined by [RFC3986]. Identifier (URI) is defined by [RFC3986].
Contact information is defined using jCards as described in Contact information is defined using jCards as described in
[RFC7095]. The "fn" member is required and MUST NOT be null [RFC7095]. The "fn" member is required and MUST NOT be null
according to [RFC6350], where an empty "fn" member MAY be used when according to [RFC6350]. An empty "fn" member MAY be used when the
the contact name does not exist or is redacted. contact name does not exist or is redacted.
4. Common Data Structures 4. Common Data Structures
This section defines common data structures used in responses and This section defines common data structures used in responses and
object classes. object classes.
4.1. RDAP Conformance 4.1. RDAP Conformance
The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings, The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings,
each providing a hint as to the specifications used in the each providing a hint as to the specifications used in the
construction of the response. This data structure MUST appear in the construction of the response. This data structure MUST appear in the
topmost JSON object of a response. A response to a "help" request topmost JSON object of a response and MUST NOT appear anywhere else.
will include identifiers for all of the specifications supported by A response to a "help" request will include identifiers for all of
the server. A response to any other request will include only the specifications supported by the server. A response to any other
identifiers for the specifications used in the construction of the request will include only identifiers for the specifications used in
response. The set of returned identifiers MAY vary depending on the the construction of the response. The set of returned identifiers
authorization level of the client. MAY vary depending on the authorization level of the client.
An example rdapConformance data structure: An example rdapConformance data structure:
"rdapConformance" : "rdapConformance" :
[ [
"rdap_level_0" "rdap_level_0"
] ]
Figure 3 Figure 3
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at line 412
"title" : "title", "title" : "title",
"media" : "screen", "media" : "screen",
"type" : "application/json" "type" : "application/json"
} }
Figure 5 Figure 5
The JSON name/values of "rel", "href", "hreflang", "title", "media", The JSON name/values of "rel", "href", "hreflang", "title", "media",
and "type" correspond to values found in Section 3 of [RFC8288]. The and "type" correspond to values found in Section 3 of [RFC8288]. The
"value" JSON value is the context URI as described by [RFC8288]. The "value" JSON value is the context URI as described by [RFC8288]. The
"value", "rel" and "href" JSON values MUST be specified. All other "value", "rel", and "href" JSON values MUST be specified. All other
JSON values are OPTIONAL. A "related" link relation MUST NOT include JSON values are OPTIONAL. A "related" link relation MUST NOT include
an "href" URI that is the same as the "self" link relation "href" URI an "href" URI that is the same as the "self" link relation "href" URI
to reduce the risk of infinite client processing loops. to reduce the risk of infinite client processing loops.
Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) returned in URIs SHOULD be Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) returned in URIs SHOULD be
consistently returned in LDH name format to allow clients to process consistently returned in LDH name format to allow clients to process
these IDNs according to their capabilities. these IDNs according to their capabilities.
This is an example of the "links" array as it might be found in an This is an example of the "links" array as it might be found in an
object class: object class:
skipping to change at page 12, line 41 skipping to change at line 543
This data structure consists solely of a name/value pair, where the This data structure consists solely of a name/value pair, where the
name is "lang" and the value is a string containing a language name is "lang" and the value is a string containing a language
identifier as described in [RFC5646]. identifier as described in [RFC5646].
"lang" : "mn-Cyrl-MN" "lang" : "mn-Cyrl-MN"
Figure 10 Figure 10
The "lang" attribute as defined in this section MAY appear anywhere The "lang" attribute as defined in this section MAY appear anywhere
in an object class or data structure, except for in jCard objects. in an object class or data structure, except for in jCard objects.
jCard supports similar functionality by way of the LANGUAGE property vCard supports similar functionality by way of the LANGUAGE property
parameter (see Section 5.1 of RFC 6350 [RFC6350]). parameter (see Section 5.1 of RFC 6350 [RFC6350]).
4.5. Events 4.5. Events
This data structure represents events that have occurred on an This data structure represents events that have occurred on an
instance of an object class (see Section 5 regarding object classes). instance of an object class (see Section 5 regarding object classes).
This is an example of an "events" array. This is an example of an "events" array.
"events" : "events" :
skipping to change at page 14, line 7 skipping to change at line 602
See Appendix B regarding the various ways events can be modeled. See Appendix B regarding the various ways events can be modeled.
4.6. Status 4.6. Status
This data structure, named "status", is an array of strings This data structure, named "status", is an array of strings
indicating the state of a registered object (see Section 10.2.2 for a indicating the state of a registered object (see Section 10.2.2 for a
list of values). list of values).
4.7. Port 43 WHOIS Server 4.7. Port 43 WHOIS Server
This data structure, a member named "port43", is a simple string This data structure, a member named "port43", is a simple character
containing the fully qualified host name or IP address of the WHOIS string containing the fully qualified host name or IP address of the
[RFC3912] server where the containing object instance may be found. WHOIS [RFC3912] server where the containing object instance may be
Note that this is not a URI, as there is no WHOIS URI scheme. found. Note that this is not a URI, as there is no WHOIS URI scheme.
4.8. Public IDs 4.8. Public IDs
This data structure maps a public identifier to an object class. It This data structure maps a public identifier to an object class. It
is named "publicIds" and is an array of objects, with each object is named "publicIds" and is an array of objects, with each object
containing the following REQUIRED members: containing the following REQUIRED members:
* type -- a string denoting the type of public identifier * type -- a string denoting the type of public identifier
* identifier -- a string denoting a public identifier of the type * identifier -- a string denoting a public identifier of the type
skipping to change at page 16, line 8 skipping to change at line 694
] ]
} }
] ]
} }
Figure 13 Figure 13
5. Object Classes 5. Object Classes
Object classes represent structures appropriate for a response from Object classes represent structures appropriate for a response from
the queries specified in [I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis]. the queries specified in [RFC9082].
Each object class contains a "links" array as specified in Each object class contains a "links" array as specified in
Section 4.2. For every object class instance in a response, whether Section 4.2. For every object class instance in a response, whether
the object class instance is directly representing the response to a the object class instance is directly representing the response to a
query or is embedded in other object class instances or is an item in query or is embedded in other object class instances or is an item in
a search result set, servers SHOULD provide a link representing a URI a search result set, servers SHOULD provide a link representing a URI
for that object class instance using the "self" relationship as for that object class instance using the "self" relationship as
described in the IANA registry specified by [RFC8288]. As explained described in the IANA registry specified by [RFC8288]. As explained
in Section 5.2, this may be not always be possible for nameserver in Section 5.2, this may be not always be possible for nameserver
data. Clients MUST be able to process object instances without a data. Clients MUST be able to process object instances without a
skipping to change at page 17, line 9 skipping to change at line 738
"type" : "application/rdap+json" "type" : "application/rdap+json"
} }
] ]
Figure 14 Figure 14
5.1. The Entity Object Class 5.1. The Entity Object Class
The entity object class appears throughout this document and is an The entity object class appears throughout this document and is an
appropriate response for the /entity/XXXX query defined in appropriate response for the /entity/XXXX query defined in
"Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Format" "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Format" [RFC9082].
[I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis]. This object class represents the This object class represents the information of organizations,
information of organizations, corporations, governments, non-profits, corporations, governments, non-profits, clubs, individual persons,
clubs, individual persons, and informal groups of people. All of and informal groups of people. All of these representations are so
these representations are so similar that it is best to represent similar that it is best to represent them in JSON [RFC8259] with one
them in JSON [RFC8259] with one construct, the entity object class, construct, the entity object class, to aid in the reuse of code by
to aid in the reuse of code by implementers. implementers.
The entity object class uses jCard [RFC7095] to represent contact The entity object class uses jCard [RFC7095] to represent contact
information, such as postal addresses, email addresses, phone numbers information, such as postal addresses, email addresses, phone numbers
and names of organizations and individuals. Many of the types of and names of organizations and individuals. Many of the types of
information that can be represented with jCard have no use in RDAP, information that can be represented with jCard have little or no use
such as birthdays, anniversaries, and gender. in RDAP, such as birthdays, anniversaries, and gender.
The entity object is served by both RIRs and DNRs. The following is The entity object is served by both RIRs and DNRs. The following is
an example of an entity that might be served by an RIR. an example of an entity that might be served by an RIR.
{ {
"objectClassName" : "entity", "objectClassName" : "entity",
"handle":"XXXX", "handle":"XXXX",
"vcardArray":[ "vcardArray":[
"vcard", "vcard",
[ [
skipping to change at page 23, line 16 skipping to change at line 1027
See Appendix A for use of the entity object class to model various See Appendix A for use of the entity object class to model various
types of entities found in both RIRs and DNRs. See Appendix C types of entities found in both RIRs and DNRs. See Appendix C
regarding structured vs. unstructured postal addresses in entities. regarding structured vs. unstructured postal addresses in entities.
5.2. The Nameserver Object Class 5.2. The Nameserver Object Class
The nameserver object class represents information regarding DNS The nameserver object class represents information regarding DNS
nameservers used in both forward and reverse DNS. RIRs and some DNRs nameservers used in both forward and reverse DNS. RIRs and some DNRs
register or expose nameserver information as an attribute of a domain register or expose nameserver information as an attribute of a domain
name, while other DNRs model nameservers as "first class objects". name, while other DNRs model nameservers as "first class objects".
Please note that some of the examples in this section include lines
that have been wrapped for reading clarity.
The nameserver object class accommodates both models and degrees of The nameserver object class accommodates both models and degrees of
variation in between. variation in between.
The following is an example of a nameserver object. The following is an example of a nameserver object.
{ {
"objectClassName" : "nameserver", "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
"handle" : "XXXX", "handle" : "XXXX",
"ldhName" : "ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example", "ldhName" : "ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example",
skipping to change at page 24, line 30 skipping to change at line 1060
[ [
"She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.", "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
"Originally written by Terry Sullivan." "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
] ]
} }
], ],
"links" : "links" :
[ [
{ {
"value" : "https://example.net/nameserver/ "value" : "https://example.net/nameserver/
ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example", ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example",
"rel" : "self", "rel" : "self",
"href" : "https://example.net/nameserver/ "href" : "https://example.net/nameserver/
ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example", ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example",
"type" : "application/rdap+json" "type" : "application/rdap+json"
} }
], ],
"port43" : "whois.example.net", "port43" : "whois.example.net",
"events" : "events" :
[ [
{ {
skipping to change at page 27, line 47 skipping to change at line 1222
described in Section 3 described in Section 3
* variants -- an array of objects, each containing the following * variants -- an array of objects, each containing the following
values: values:
- relation -- an array of strings, with each string denoting the - relation -- an array of strings, with each string denoting the
relationship between the variants and the containing domain relationship between the variants and the containing domain
object (see Section 10.2.5 for a list of suggested variant object (see Section 10.2.5 for a list of suggested variant
relations). relations).
- idnTable -- the name of the Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) - idnTable -- the character string literal that represents the
table of codepoints, such as one listed with the IANA (see IDN Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) table that has been
tables [IANA_IDNTABLES]). registered in the IANA Repository of IDN Practices
[IANA_IDNTABLES].
- variantNames -- an array of objects, with each object - variantNames -- an array of objects, with each object
containing an "ldhName" member and a "unicodeName" member (see containing an "ldhName" member and a "unicodeName" member (see
Section 3). Section 3).
* nameservers -- an array of nameserver objects as defined by * nameservers -- an array of nameserver objects as defined by
Section 5.2 Section 5.2
* secureDNS -- an object with the following members: * secureDNS -- an object with the following members:
skipping to change at page 29, line 16 skipping to change at line 1287
the DNSKEY record [RFC4034] in presentation format the DNSKEY record [RFC4034] in presentation format
o algorithm -- an integer as specified by the algorithm field o algorithm -- an integer as specified by the algorithm field
of a DNSKEY record as specified by [RFC4034] in presentation of a DNSKEY record as specified by [RFC4034] in presentation
format format
o events -- see Section 4.5 o events -- see Section 4.5
o links -- see Section 4.2 o links -- see Section 4.2
See Appendix D for background information on these See Appendix D for background information on these objects.
objects.
* entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1 * entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1
* status -- see Section 4.6 * status -- see Section 4.6
* publicIds -- see Section 4.8 * publicIds -- see Section 4.8
* remarks -- see Section 4.3 * remarks -- see Section 4.3
* links -- see Section 4.2 * links -- see Section 4.2
* port43 -- see Section 4.7 * port43 -- see Section 4.7
* events -- see Section 4.5 * events -- see Section 4.5
* network -- represents the IP network for which a reverse DNS * network -- represents the IP network for which a reverse DNS
domain is referenced; see Section 5.4 domain is referenced; see Section 5.4
The following is an example of a JSON domain object representing a The following is an example of a JSON domain object representing a
reverse DNS delegation point that might be served by an RIR. reverse DNS delegation point that might be served by an RIR (note
that the dsData digest value has been modified to fit on one line).
{ {
"objectClassName" : "domain", "objectClassName" : "domain",
"handle" : "XXXX", "handle" : "XXXX",
"ldhName" : "0.2.192.in-addr.arpa", "ldhName" : "0.2.192.in-addr.arpa",
"nameservers" : "nameservers" :
[ [
{ {
"objectClassName" : "nameserver", "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
"ldhName" : "ns1.rir.example" "ldhName" : "ns1.rir.example"
skipping to change at page 30, line 4 skipping to change at line 1324
"nameservers" : "nameservers" :
[ [
{ {
"objectClassName" : "nameserver", "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
"ldhName" : "ns1.rir.example" "ldhName" : "ns1.rir.example"
}, },
{ {
"objectClassName" : "nameserver", "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
"ldhName" : "ns2.rir.example" "ldhName" : "ns2.rir.example"
} }
], ],
"secureDNS": "secureDNS":
{ {
"delegationSigned": true, "delegationSigned": true,
"dsData": "dsData":
[ [
{ {
"keyTag": 12345, "keyTag": 25345,
"algorithm": 3, "algorithm": 8,
"digestType": 1, "digestType": 2,
"digest": "49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC" "digest": "2788970E18EA14...C890C85B8205B94"
} }
] ]
}, },
"remarks" : "remarks" :
[ [
{ {
"description" : "description" :
[ [
"She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.", "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
"Originally written by Terry Sullivan." "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
skipping to change at page 33, line 6 skipping to change at line 1468
"type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION", "type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION",
"country" : "AU", "country" : "AU",
"parentHandle" : "YYYY-RIR", "parentHandle" : "YYYY-RIR",
"status" : [ "active" ] "status" : [ "active" ]
} }
} }
Figure 23 Figure 23
The following is an example of a JSON domain object representing a The following is an example of a JSON domain object representing a
forward DNS delegation point that might be served by a DNR. forward DNS delegation point that might be served by a DNR. Note
that the secureDNS keyData publicKey value has been modified to fit
on a single line.
{ {
"objectClassName" : "domain", "objectClassName" : "domain",
"handle" : "XXXX", "handle" : "XXXX",
"ldhName" : "xn--fo-5ja.example", "ldhName" : "xn--fo-5ja.example",
"unicodeName" : "fóo.example", "unicodeName" : "fóo.example",
"variants" : "variants" :
[ [
{ {
"relation" : [ "registered", "conjoined" ], "relation" : [ "registered", "conjoined" ],
skipping to change at page 35, line 49 skipping to change at line 1609
{ {
"zoneSigned": true, "zoneSigned": true,
"delegationSigned": true, "delegationSigned": true,
"maxSigLife": 604800, "maxSigLife": 604800,
"keyData": "keyData":
[ [
{ {
"flags": 257, "flags": 257,
"protocol": 3, "protocol": 3,
"algorithm": 1, "algorithm": 8,
"publicKey": "AQPJ////4Q==", "publicKey": "AwEAAa6eDzronzjEDbT...Jg1M5N rBSPkuXpdFE=",
"events": "events":
[ [
{ {
"eventAction": "last changed", "eventAction": "last changed",
"eventDate": "2012-07-23T05:15:47Z" "eventDate": "2012-07-23T05:15:47Z"
} }
] ]
} }
] ]
}, },
skipping to change at page 38, line 46 skipping to change at line 1751
} }
] ]
} }
Figure 24 Figure 24
5.4. The IP Network Object Class 5.4. The IP Network Object Class
The IP network object class models IP network registrations found in The IP network object class models IP network registrations found in
RIRs and is the expected response for the "/ip" query as defined by RIRs and is the expected response for the "/ip" query as defined by
[I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis]. There is no equivalent object class [RFC9082]. There is no equivalent object class for DNRs. The high-
for DNRs. The high- level structure of the IP network object class level structure of the IP network object class consists of
consists of information about the network registration and entities information about the network registration and entities related to
related to the IP network (e.g., registrant information, contacts, the IP network (e.g., registrant information, contacts, etc.).
etc.).
The following is an elided example of the IP network object type The following is an elided example of the IP network object type
showing the high-level structure: showing the high-level structure:
{ {
"objectClassName" : "ip network", "objectClassName" : "ip network",
"handle" : "XXX", "handle" : "XXX",
... ...
"entities" : "entities" :
[ [
skipping to change at page 40, line 6 skipping to change at line 1806
[ [
{ {
"value" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48", "value" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48",
"rel" : "self", "rel" : "self",
"href" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48", "href" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48",
"type" : "application/rdap+json" "type" : "application/rdap+json"
}, },
{ {
"value" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48", "value" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48",
"rel" : "up", "rel" : "up",
"href" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:c00::/23", "href" : "https://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/32",
"type" : "application/rdap+json" "type" : "application/rdap+json"
} }
], ],
"events" : "events" :
[ [
{ {
"eventAction" : "registration", "eventAction" : "registration",
"eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z" "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
}, },
{ {
skipping to change at page 42, line 30 skipping to change at line 1925
network, either IPv4 or IPv6 network, either IPv4 or IPv6
* ipVersion -- a string signifying the IP protocol version of the * ipVersion -- a string signifying the IP protocol version of the
network: "v4" signifies an IPv4 network, and "v6" signifies an network: "v4" signifies an IPv4 network, and "v6" signifies an
IPv6 network IPv6 network
* name -- a string representing an identifier assigned to the * name -- a string representing an identifier assigned to the
network registration by the registration holder network registration by the registration holder
* type -- a string containing an RIR-specific classification of the * type -- a string containing an RIR-specific classification of the
network network per that RIR's registration model
* country -- a string containing the two-character country code of * country -- a string containing the two-character country code of
the network the network
* parentHandle -- a string containing an RIR-unique identifier of * parentHandle -- a string containing an RIR-unique identifier of
the parent network of this network registration the parent network of this network registration
* status -- an array of strings indicating the state of the IP * status -- an array of strings indicating the state of the IP
network as defined by Section 4.6 network as defined by Section 4.6
skipping to change at page 43, line 9 skipping to change at line 1950
* links -- see Section 4.2 * links -- see Section 4.2
* port43 -- see Section 4.7 * port43 -- see Section 4.7
* events -- see Section 4.5 * events -- see Section 4.5
5.5. The Autonomous System Number Object Class 5.5. The Autonomous System Number Object Class
The Autonomous System number (autnum) object class models Autonomous The Autonomous System number (autnum) object class models Autonomous
System number registrations found in RIRs and represents the expected System number registrations found in RIRs and represents the expected
response to an "/autnum" query as defined by response to an "/autnum" query as defined by [RFC9082]. There is no
[I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis]. There is no equivalent object class equivalent object class for DNRs. The high-level structure of the
for DNRs. The high-level structure of the autnum object class autnum object class consists of information about the Autonomous
consists of information about the autonomous system number System number registration and entities related to the autnum
registration and entities related to the autnum registration (e.g., registration (e.g., registrant information, contacts, etc.) and is
registrant information, contacts, etc.) and is similar to the IP similar to the IP network object class.
network object class.
The following is an example of a JSON object representing an autnum. The following is an example of a JSON object representing an autnum.
{ {
"objectClassName" : "autnum", "objectClassName" : "autnum",
"handle" : "XXXX-RIR", "handle" : "XXXX-RIR",
"startAutnum" : 10, "startAutnum" : 65536,
"endAutnum" : 15, "endAutnum" : 65541,
"name": "AS-RTR-1", "name": "AS-RTR-1",
"type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION", "type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION",
"status" : [ "active" ], "status" : [ "active" ],
"country": "AU", "country": "AU",
"remarks" : "remarks" :
[ [
{ {
"description" : "description" :
[ [
"She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.", "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
"Originally written by Terry Sullivan." "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
] ]
} }
], ],
"links" : "links" :
[ [
{ {
"value" : "https://example.net/autnum/xxxx", "value" : "https://example.net/autnum/65537",
"rel" : "self", "rel" : "self",
"href" : "https://example.net/autnum/xxxx", "href" : "https://example.net/autnum/65537",
"type" : "application/rdap+json" "type" : "application/rdap+json"
} }
], ],
"events" : "events" :
[ [
{ {
"eventAction" : "registration", "eventAction" : "registration",
"eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z" "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
}, },
{ {
"eventAction" : "last changed", "eventAction" : "last changed",
"eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z" "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
} }
], ],
"entities" : "entities" :
[ [
{ {
"objectClassName" : "entity", "objectClassName" : "entity",
skipping to change at page 46, line 16 skipping to change at line 2100
starting number [RFC5396] in the block of Autonomous System starting number [RFC5396] in the block of Autonomous System
numbers numbers
* endAutnum -- an unsigned 32-bit integer representing the ending * endAutnum -- an unsigned 32-bit integer representing the ending
number [RFC5396] in the block of Autonomous System numbers number [RFC5396] in the block of Autonomous System numbers
* name -- a string representing an identifier assigned to the autnum * name -- a string representing an identifier assigned to the autnum
registration by the registration holder registration by the registration holder
* type -- a string containing an RIR-specific classification of the * type -- a string containing an RIR-specific classification of the
autnum autnum per that RIR's registration model
* status -- an array of strings indicating the state of the autnum * status -- an array of strings indicating the state of the autnum
as defined by Section 4.6 as defined by Section 4.6
* country -- a string containing the two-character country code of * country -- a string containing the two-character country code of
the autnum the autnum
* entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1 * entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1
* remarks -- see Section 4.3 * remarks -- see Section 4.3
skipping to change at page 48, line 4 skipping to change at line 2178
], ],
"lang" : "en", "lang" : "en",
"errorCode": 418, "errorCode": 418,
"title": "Your beverage choice is not available", "title": "Your beverage choice is not available",
"description": "description":
[ [
"I know coffee has more ummppphhh.", "I know coffee has more ummppphhh.",
"Sorry, dude!" "Sorry, dude!"
] ]
} }
Figure 29 Figure 29
7. Responding to Help Queries 7. Responding to Help Queries
The appropriate response to /help queries as defined by The appropriate response to /help queries as defined by [RFC9082] is
[I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis] is to use the notices structure as to use the notices structure as defined in Section 4.3.
defined in Section 4.3.
This is an example of a response to a /help query including the This is an example of a response to a /help query including the
rdapConformance data structure. rdapConformance data structure.
{ {
"rdapConformance" : "rdapConformance" :
[ [
"rdap_level_0" "rdap_level_0"
], ],
"notices" : "notices" :
skipping to change at page 48, line 45 skipping to change at line 2219
} }
] ]
} }
] ]
} }
Figure 30 Figure 30
8. Responding To Searches 8. Responding To Searches
[I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis] specifies three types of searches: [RFC9082] specifies three types of searches: domains, nameservers,
domains, nameservers, and entities. Responses to these searches take and entities. Responses to these searches take the form of an array
the form of an array of object instances where each instance is an of object instances where each instance is an appropriate object
appropriate object class for the search (i.e., a search for /domains class for the search (i.e., a search for /domains yields an array of
yields an array of domain object instances). These arrays are domain object instances). These arrays are contained within the
contained within the response object. response object.
The names of the arrays are as follows: The names of the arrays are as follows:
* for /domains searches, the array is "domainSearchResults" * for /domains searches, the array is "domainSearchResults"
* for /nameservers searches, the array is "nameserverSearchResults" * for /nameservers searches, the array is "nameserverSearchResults"
* for /entities searches, the array is "entitySearchResults" * for /entities searches, the array is "entitySearchResults"
The following is an elided example of a response to a /domains The following is an elided example of a response to a /domains
skipping to change at page 51, line 51 skipping to change at line 2360
} }
] ]
} }
] ]
} }
Figure 33 Figure 33
10. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to update the description of the "transfer" event IANA has updated the description of the "transfer" event action as
action as described in Section 10.2.3. described in Section 10.2.3.
10.1. RDAP JSON Media Type Registration 10.1. RDAP JSON Media Type Registration
This specification registers the "application/rdap+json" media IANA has updated the media type registration as described below.
type.
Type name: application
Subtype name: rdap+json This specification registers the "application/rdap+json" media type.
Required parameters: n/a Type name: application
Encoding considerations: See Section 3.1 of [RFC6839]. Subtype name: rdap+json
Security considerations: The media represented by this identifier Required parameters: n/a
Encoding considerations: See Section 3.1 of [RFC6839].
Security considerations: The media represented by this identifier
does not have security considerations beyond that found in does not have security considerations beyond that found in
Section 12 of [RFC8259]. Section 12 of [RFC8259].
Interoperability considerations: There are no known Interoperability considerations: There are no known interoperability
interoperability problems regarding this media format. problems regarding this media format.
Published specification: RFC 7483 Published specification: RFC 9083
Applications that use this media type: Implementations of the Applications that use this media type: Implementations of the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP). Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP).
Additional information: This media type is a product of the IETF Additional information: This media type is a product of the IETF
WEIRDS working group. The WEIRDS charter, information on the REGEXT Working Group. The REGEXT charter, information on the
WEIRDS mailing list, and other documents produced by the WEIRDS REGEXT mailing list, and other documents produced by the REGEXT
working group can be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/ Working Group can be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/
weirds/. regext/.
Person & email address to contact for further information: IESG Person & email address to contact for further information:
<iesg@ietf.org> IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Intended usage: COMMON Intended usage: COMMON
Restrictions on usage: none Restrictions on usage: none
Author: Andy Newton Author: Andy Newton
Change controller: IETF Change controller: IETF
Provisional Registration: No (upon publication of this RFC) Provisional Registration: No
10.2. JSON Values Registry 10.2. JSON Values Registry
IANA has created a category in the protocol registries labeled IANA has created a category in the protocol registries labeled
"Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", and within that category, "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", and within that category,
IANA has established a URL-referenceable, stand-alone registry IANA has established a URL-referenceable, stand-alone registry
labeled "RDAP JSON Values". This new registry is for use in the labeled "RDAP JSON Values". This new registry is for use in the
notices and remarks (Section 4.3), status (Section 4.6), role notices and remarks (Section 4.3), status (Section 4.6), role
(Section 5.1), event action (Section 4.5), and domain variant (Section 5.1), event action (Section 4.5), and domain variant
relation (Section 5.3) fields specified in RDAP. relation (Section 5.3) fields specified in RDAP.
skipping to change at page 54, line 36 skipping to change at line 2486
DNR or RIR to make this determination. DNR or RIR to make this determination.
The following sections provide initial registrations into this The following sections provide initial registrations into this
registry. registry.
10.2.1. Notice and Remark Types 10.2.1. Notice and Remark Types
The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values" The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
registry: registry:
* Value: result set truncated due to authorization Value: result set truncated due to authorization
Type: notice and remark type
Type: notice and remark type Description: The list of results does not contain all results due to
lack of authorization. This may indicate to some clients that
Description: The list of results does not contain all results due
to lack of authorization. This may indicate to some clients that
proper authorization will yield a longer result set. proper authorization will yield a longer result set.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: result set truncated due to excessive load
Type: notice and remark type
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The list of results does not contain all results due to
an excessively heavy load on the server. This may indicate to
* Value: result set truncated due to excessive load
Type: notice and remark type
Description: The list of results does not contain all results due
to excessively heavy load on the server. This may indicate to
some clients that requerying at a later time will yield a longer some clients that requerying at a later time will yield a longer
result set. result set.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: result set truncated due to unexplainable reasons
Type: notice and remark type
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The list of results does not contain all results for an
unexplainable reason. This may indicate to some clients that
* Value: result set truncated due to unexplainable reasons
Type: notice and remark type
Description: The list of results does not contain all results for
an unexplainable reason. This may indicate to some clients that
requerying for any reason will not yield a longer result set. requerying for any reason will not yield a longer result set.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: object truncated due to authorization
Type: notice and remark type
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object does not contain all data due to lack of
* Value: object truncated due to authorization
Type: notice and remark type
Description: The object does not contain all data due to lack of
authorization. authorization.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: object truncated due to excessive load
Type: notice and remark type
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object does not contain all data due to an
* Value: object truncated due to excessive load
Type: notice and remark type
Description: The object does not contain all data due to
excessively heavy load on the server. This may indicate to some excessively heavy load on the server. This may indicate to some
clients that requerying at a later time will yield all data of the clients that requerying at a later time will yield all data of the
object. object.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: object truncated due to unexplainable reasons
Type: notice and remark type
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object does not contain all data for an
* Value: object truncated due to unexplainable reasons
Type: notice and remark type
Description: The object does not contain all data for an
unexplainable reason. unexplainable reason.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Name: IESG Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
10.2.2. Status 10.2.2. Status
The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values" The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
registry: registry:
* Value: validated Value: validated
Type: status
Type: status Description: Signifies that the data of the object instance has been
found to be accurate. This type of status is usually found on
Description: Signifies that the data of the object instance has entity object instances to note the validity of identifying
been found to be accurate. This type of status is usually found
on entity object instances to note the validity of identifying
contact information. contact information.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: renew prohibited
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: Renewal or reregistration of the object instance is
* Value: renew prohibited
Type: status
Description: Renewal or reregistration of the object instance is
forbidden. forbidden.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: update prohibited
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: Updates to the object instance are forbidden.
Registrant Name: IESG
* Value: update prohibited Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: status
Description: Updates to the object instance are forbidden.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: transfer prohibited
Type: status
Description: Transfers of the registration from one registrar to Value: transfer prohibited
Type: status
Description: Transfers of the registration from one registrar to
another are forbidden. This type of status normally applies to another are forbidden. This type of status normally applies to
DNR domain names. DNR domain names.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: delete prohibited
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: Deletion of the registration of the object instance is
forbidden. This type of status normally applies to DNR domain
* Value: delete prohibited
Type: status
Description: Deletion of the registration of the object instance
is forbidden. This type of status normally applies to DNR domain
names. names.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: proxy
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The registration of the object instance has been
* Value: proxy
Type: status
Description: The registration of the object instance has been
performed by a third party. This is most commonly applied to performed by a third party. This is most commonly applied to
entities. entities.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: private
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The information of the object instance is not
* Value: private
Type: status
Description: The information of the object instance is not
designated for public consumption. This is most commonly applied designated for public consumption. This is most commonly applied
to entities. to entities.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: removed
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: Some of the information of the object instance has not
been made available and has been removed. This is most commonly
* Value: removed applied to entities.
Type: status Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Description: Some of the information of the object instance has
not been made available and has been removed. This is most
commonly applied to entities.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: obscured
Type: status
Description: Some of the information of the object instance has Value: obscured
been altered for the purposes of not readily revealing the actual Type: status
Description: Some of the information of the object instance has been
altered for the purposes of not readily revealing the actual
information of the object instance. This is most commonly applied information of the object instance. This is most commonly applied
to entities. to entities.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: associated
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object instance is associated with other object
* Value: associated
Type: status
Description: The object instance is associated with other object
instances in the registry. This is most commonly used to signify instances in the registry. This is most commonly used to signify
that a nameserver is associated with a domain or that an entity is that a nameserver is associated with a domain or that an entity is
associated with a network resource or domain. associated with a network resource or domain.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: active
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object instance is in use. For domain names, it
* Value: active
Type: status
Description: The object instance is in use. For domain names, it
signifies that the domain name is published in DNS. For network signifies that the domain name is published in DNS. For network
and autnum registrations it signifies that they are allocated or and autnum registrations, it signifies that they are allocated or
assigned for use in operational networks. This maps to the assigned for use in operational networks. This maps to the "OK"
Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730] 'OK' status. status of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730].
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Name: IESG Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: inactive
Type: status
Description: The object instance is not in use. See 'active'.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: locked
Type: status Value: inactive
Type: status
Description: The object instance is not in use. See "active".
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Description: Changes to the object instance cannot be made, Value: locked
Type: status
Description: Changes to the object instance cannot be made,
including the association of other object instances. including the association of other object instances.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: pending create
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: A request has been received for the creation of the
object instance, but this action is not yet complete.
* Value: pending create Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: status
Description: A request has been received for the creation of the
object instance but this action is not yet complete.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: pending renew
Type: status
Description: A request has been received for the renewal of the
object instance but this action is not yet complete.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: pending transfer
Type: status
Description: A request has been received for the transfer of the
object instance but this action is not yet complete.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: pending update Value: pending renew
Type: status
Description: A request has been received for the renewal of the
object instance, but this action is not yet complete.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: status Value: pending transfer
Type: status
Description: A request has been received for the transfer of the
object instance, but this action is not yet complete.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Description: A request has been received for the update or Value: pending update
modification of the object instance but this action is not yet Type: status
Description: A request has been received for the update or
modification of the object instance, but this action is not yet
complete. complete.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: pending delete
Type: status
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: A request has been received for the deletion or removal
of the object instance, but this action is not yet complete. For
* Value: pending delete domains, this might mean that the name is no longer published in
DNS but has not yet been purged from the registry database.
Type: status Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Description: A request has been received for the deletion or
removal of the object instance but this action is not yet
complete. For domains, this might mean that the name is no longer
published in DNS but has not yet been purged from the registry
database.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
10.2.3. Event Actions 10.2.3. Event Actions
The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values" The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
registry: registry:
* Value: registration Value: registration
Type: event action
Type: event action Description: The object instance was initially registered.
Registrant Name: IESG
Description: The object instance was initially registered. Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: reregistration
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was registered subsequently to Value: reregistration
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was registered subsequently to
initial registration. initial registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: last changed
Type: event action
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: An action noting when the information in the object
* Value: last changed
Type: event action
Description: An action noting when the information in the object
instance was last changed. instance was last changed.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: expiration
Type: event action
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object instance has been removed or will be removed
at a predetermined date and time from the registry.
* Value: expiration Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: event action
Description: The object instance has been removed or will be
removed at a pre-determined date and time from the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: deletion
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was removed from the registry at
a point in time that was not pre-determined.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: reinstantiation
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was reregistered after having
been removed from the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: transfer
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was transferred from one
registrar to another.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Value: deletion
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was removed from the registry at a
point in time that was not predetermined.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: locked Value: reinstantiation
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was reregistered after having been
removed from the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: event action Value: transfer
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was transferred from one registrar
to another.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Description: The object instance was locked (see the 'locked' Value: locked
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was locked (see the "locked"
status). status).
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: unlocked
Type: event action
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The object instance was unlocked (see the "locked"
* Value: unlocked
Type: event action
Description: The object instance was unlocked (see the 'locked'
status). status).
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Name: IESG Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
10.2.4. Roles 10.2.4. Roles
The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values" The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
registry: registry:
* Value: registrant Value: registrant
Type: role
Type: role Description: The entity object instance is the registrant of the
Description: The entity object instance is the registrant of the
registration. In some registries, this is known as a maintainer. registration. In some registries, this is known as a maintainer.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: technical
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The entity object instance is a technical contact for
* Value: technical
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance is a technical contact for
the registration. the registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: administrative
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The entity object instance is an administrative contact
for the registration.
* Value: administrative Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance is an administrative
contact for the registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: abuse
Type: role Value: abuse
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance handles network abuse issues
on behalf of the registrant of the registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Description: The entity object instance handles network abuse Value: billing
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance handles payment and billing
issues on behalf of the registrant of the registration. issues on behalf of the registrant of the registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: registrar
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The entity object instance represents the authority
* Value: billing
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance handles payment and
billing issues on behalf of the registrant of the registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: registrar
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance represents the authority
responsible for the registration in the registry. responsible for the registration in the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: reseller
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The entity object instance represents a third party
through which the registration was conducted (i.e., not the
* Value: reseller
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance represents a third party
through which the registration was conducted (i.e. not the
registry or registrar). registry or registrar).
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: sponsor
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The entity object instance represents a domain policy
sponsor, such as an ICANN-approved sponsor.
* Value: sponsor Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance represents a domain policy
sponsor, such as an ICANN approved sponsor.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: proxy
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance represents a proxy for Value: proxy
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance represents a proxy for
another entity object, such as a registrant. another entity object, such as a registrant.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: notifications
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: An entity object instance designated to receive
* Value: notifications
Type: role
Description: An entity object instance designated to receive
notifications about association object instances. notifications about association object instances.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: noc
Type: role
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: The entity object instance handles communications
* Value: noc
Type: role
Description: The entity object instance handles communications
related to a network operations center (NOC). related to a network operations center (NOC).
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Name: IESG Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
10.2.5. Variant Relations 10.2.5. Variant Relations
The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values" The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
registry: registry:
* Value: registered Value: registered
Type: domain variant relation
Type: domain variant relation Description: The variant names are registered in the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Description: The variant names are registered in the registry. Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: unregistered
Type: domain variant relation
Description: The variant names are not found in the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
* Value: registration restricted Value: unregistered
Type: domain variant relation
Description: The variant names are not found in the registry.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: domain variant relation Value: registration restricted
Description: Registration of the variant names is restricted to Type: domain variant relation
Description: Registration of the variant names is restricted to
certain parties or within certain rules. certain parties or within certain rules.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: open registration
Type: domain variant relation
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: Registration of the variant names is available to
* Value: open registration
Type: domain variant relation
Description: Registration of the variant names is available to
generally qualified registrants. generally qualified registrants.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Registrant Name: IESG Value: conjoined
Type: domain variant relation
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org Description: Registration of the variant names occurs automatically
with the registration of the containing domain registration.
* Value: conjoined Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
Type: domain variant relation
Description: Registration of the variant names occurs
automatically with the registration of the containing domain
registration.
Registrant Name: IESG
Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org
11. Implementation Status
NOTE: Please remove this section and the reference to RFC 7942 prior
to publication as an RFC.
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942
[RFC7942]. The description of implementations in this section is
intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing
drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual
implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF.
Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the information
presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not
intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available
implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that
other implementations may exist.
According to RFC 7942, "this will allow reviewers and working groups
to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
they see fit".
11.1. RedDog
* Responsible Organization: NIC Mexico
* Location: https://reddog.mx/
* Description: RedDog implements all the functionality of an RDAP
Server defined in RFCs 7480,7481,7482 and 7483. RedDog is highly
configurable and extensible to fit the needs of the developers and
operators.
* Level of Maturity: Production.
* Coverage: RedDog supports all lookups, searches and responses for
all object classes described in RFC 7482 and RFC 7483.
* Version Compatibility: RFC 7482 and RFC 7483
* Licensing: Apache License 2.0
* Contact Information: reddog-dev@nic.mx
* Information last updated: November 22, 2019
11.2. Verisign
* Responsible Organization: Verisign
* Location: https://rdap.verisign.com/com/v1/,
https://rdap.verisign.com/net/v1/
* Description: Verisign's production RDAP service for the .com and
.net gTLDs.
* Level of Maturity: Production.
* Coverage: Lookup of domain names, name servers, entities; name
server search by IP address; help.
* Version Compatibility: RFC 7483
* Contact Information: info@verisign-grs.com
11.3. Verisign Labs
* Responsible Organization: Verisign Labs
* Location: https://rdap.verisignlabs.com/rdap/v1/
* Description: Verisign's experimental RDAP service for the .cc and
.tv ccTLDs.
* Level of Maturity: Experimental.
* Coverage: Lookup of domain names, name servers, entities; name
server search by IP address; basic search; regular expression
search; federated authentication; help.
* Version Compatibility: RFC 7483
* Contact Information: Scott Hollenbeck, shollenbeck@verisign.com
11.4. Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)
* Responsible Organization: Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre
(APNIC)
* Location: https://rdap.apnic.net/, https://github.com/APNIC-net/
rdapd
* Description: APNIC's production RDAP service for Internet number
resouces.
* Level of Maturity: Production.
* Coverage: Lookup of IP networks, AS numbers, domains, and
entities. Also domain search by name, entity search by handle or
full name, and help responses.
* Version Compatibility: RFC 7483
* Contact Information: helpdesk@apnic.net
12. Security Considerations 11. Security Considerations
This specification models information serialized in JSON format. As This specification models information serialized in JSON format. As
JSON is a subset of JavaScript, implementations are advised to follow JSON is a subset of JavaScript, implementations are advised to follow
the security considerations outlined in Section 12 of [RFC8259] to the security considerations outlined in Section 12 of [RFC8259] to
prevent code injection. prevent code injection.
Though not specific to JSON, RDAP implementers should be aware of the Though not specific to JSON, RDAP implementers should be aware of the
security considerations specified in [RFC7480] and the security security considerations specified in [RFC7480] and the security
requirements and considerations in [RFC7481]. requirements and considerations in [RFC7481].
RDAP responses allow for retrieval of DNSSEC (key) related
information, but the RRSIG DS from the parent zone is not conveyed
alongside it. This means that the DNSSEC keys retrieved by RDAP are
disconnected from their containing PKI, and as such are not generally
expected to be trusted without additional information. In
particular, the HTTPS channel protecting the RDAP connection is not
expected to be authorized to certify the validity of the DNSSEC keys.
Clients caching data, especially clients using RDAP-specific caches Clients caching data, especially clients using RDAP-specific caches
(instead of HTTP-layer caches), should have safeguards to prevent (instead of HTTP-layer caches), should have safeguards to prevent
cache poisoning. See Section 5 for advice on using the self links cache poisoning. See Section 5 for advice on using the self links
for caching. for caching.
Finally, service operators should be aware of the privacy mechanisms Finally, service operators should be aware of the privacy mechanisms
noted in Section 14. noted in Section 13.
13. Internationalization Considerations 12. Internationalization Considerations
13.1. Character Encoding 12.1. Character Encoding
The default text encoding for JSON responses in RDAP is UTF-8 The default text encoding for JSON responses in RDAP is UTF-8
[RFC3629], and all servers and clients MUST support UTF-8. [RFC3629], and all servers and clients MUST support UTF-8.
13.2. URIs and IRIs 12.2. URIs and IRIs
[RFC7480] defines the use of URIs and IRIs in RDAP. [RFC7480] defines the use of URIs and IRIs in RDAP.
13.3. Language Tags 12.3. Language Tags
Section 4.4 defines the use of language tags in the JSON responses Section 4.4 defines the use of language tags in the JSON responses
defined in this document. defined in this document.
13.4. Internationalized Domain Names 12.4. Internationalized Domain Names
IDNs are denoted in this specification by the separation of DNS names IDNs are denoted in this specification by the separation of DNS names
in LDH form and Unicode form (see Section 3). Representation of IDNs in LDH form and Unicode form (see Section 3). Representation of IDNs
in registries is described by the "variants" object in Section 5.3 in registries is described by the "variants" object in Section 5.3
and the suggested values listed in Section 10.2.5. and the suggested values listed in Section 10.2.5.
14. Privacy Considerations 13. Privacy Considerations
This specification suggests status values to denote contact and This specification suggests status values to denote contact and
registrant information that has been marked as private and/or has registrant information that has been marked as private and/or has
been removed or obscured. See Section 10.2.2 for the complete list been removed or obscured. See Section 10.2.2 for the complete list
of status values. A few of the status values indicate that there are of status values. A few of the status values indicate that there are
privacy concerns associated with the object instance. The following privacy concerns associated with the object instance. The following
status codes SHOULD be used to describe data elements of a response status codes SHOULD be used to describe data elements of a response
when appropriate: when appropriate:
private -- The object is not be shared in query responses, unless * private -- The object is not be shared in query responses, unless
the user is authorized to view this information. the user is authorized to view this information.
removed -- Data elements within the object have been collected but * removed -- Data elements within the object have been collected but
have been omitted from the response. This option can be used to have been omitted from the response. This option can be used to
prevent unauthorized access to associated object instances without prevent unauthorized access to associated object instances without
the need to mark them as private. the need to mark them as private.
obscured -- Data elements within the object have been collected, * obscured -- Data elements within the object have been collected,
but the response value has been altered so that values are not but the response value has been altered so that values are not
easily discernible. A value changed from "1212" to "XXXX" is an easily discernible. A value changed from "1212" to "XXXX" is an
example of obscured data. This option may reveal privacy example of obscured data. This option may reveal privacy
sensitive information and should only be used when data sensitive information and should only be used when data
sensitivity does not require a more protective option like sensitivity does not require a more protective option like
"private" or "removed". "private" or "removed".
See Appendix A.1 for an example of applying those values to contacts See Appendix A.1 for an example of applying those values to contacts
and registrants. and registrants.
15. References 14. References
15.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis] 14.1. Normative References
Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02, 8 September 2020,
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-regext-
rfc7482bis-02.txt>.
[ISO.3166.1988] [ISO.3166.2020]
International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for
the representation of names of countries, 3rd edition", the representation of names of countries and their
ISO Standard 3166, August 1988. subdivisions", Fourth edition, ISO Standard 3166, August
2020.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3339] Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet: [RFC3339] Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet:
Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002, Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, July 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>.
skipping to change at page 71, line 39 skipping to change at line 3004
[RFC5952] Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6 [RFC5952] Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6
Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, Address Text Representation", RFC 5952,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5952, August 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC5952, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5952>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5952>.
[RFC7095] Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095, [RFC7095] Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7095, January 2014, DOI 10.17487/RFC7095, January 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7095>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7095>.
[RFC7480] Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the [RFC7480] Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7480, Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, March 2015, RFC 7480, DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>.
[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the [RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481, Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015, RFC 7481, DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data [RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.
[RFC8288] Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 8288, [RFC8288] Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 8288,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8288>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8288>.
15.2. Informative References [RFC9082] Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access
Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9082>.
14.2. Informative References
[IANA_IDNTABLES] [IANA_IDNTABLES]
IANA, "Repository of IDN Practices", IANA, "Repository of IDN Practices",
<https://www.iana.org/domains/idn-tables>. <https://www.iana.org/domains/idn-tables>.
[JSON_ascendancy] [JSON_ascendancy]
MacVittie, L., "The Stealthy Ascendancy of JSON", April MacVittie, L., "The Stealthy Ascendancy of JSON", April
2011, <https://devcentral.f5.com/s/articles/the-stealthy- 2011, <https://devcentral.f5.com/s/articles/the-stealthy-
ascendancy-of-json>. ascendancy-of-json>.
skipping to change at page 73, line 5 skipping to change at line 3076
[RFC6350] Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350, [RFC6350] Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6350, August 2011, DOI 10.17487/RFC6350, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6350>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6350>.
[RFC6839] Hansen, T. and A. Melnikov, "Additional Media Type [RFC6839] Hansen, T. and A. Melnikov, "Additional Media Type
Structured Syntax Suffixes", RFC 6839, Structured Syntax Suffixes", RFC 6839,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6839, January 2013, DOI 10.17487/RFC6839, January 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6839>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6839>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
Appendix A. Suggested Data Modeling with the Entity Object Class Appendix A. Suggested Data Modeling with the Entity Object Class
A.1. Registrants and Contacts A.1. Registrants and Contacts
This document does not provide specific object classes for This document does not provide specific object classes for
registrants and contacts. Instead, the entity object class may be registrants and contacts. Instead, the entity object class may be
used to represent a registrant or contact. When the entity object is used to represent a registrant or contact. When the entity object is
embedded inside a containing object such as a domain name or IP embedded inside a containing object such as a domain name or IP
network, the "roles" string array can be used to signify the network, the "roles" string array can be used to signify the
relationship. It is recommended that the values from Section 10.2.4 relationship. It is recommended that the values from Section 10.2.4
skipping to change at page 82, line 36 skipping to change at line 3531
not a universal constant in that industry. And finally, EPP's use of not a universal constant in that industry. And finally, EPP's use of
XML predates the specification of JSON. If EPP had been defined XML predates the specification of JSON. If EPP had been defined
today, it may very well have used JSON instead of XML. today, it may very well have used JSON instead of XML.
Beyond the specific DNR and RIR communities, the trend in the broader Beyond the specific DNR and RIR communities, the trend in the broader
Internet industry is also switching to JSON over XML, especially in Internet industry is also switching to JSON over XML, especially in
the area of RESTful web services (see [JSON_ascendancy]). Studies the area of RESTful web services (see [JSON_ascendancy]). Studies
have also found that JSON is generally less bulky and consequently have also found that JSON is generally less bulky and consequently
faster to parse (see [JSON_performance_study]). faster to parse (see [JSON_performance_study]).
Acknowledgments Appendix F. Changes from RFC 7483
This document is derived from original work on RIR responses in JSON
by Byron J. Ellacott, Arturo L. Servin, Kaveh Ranjbar, and Andrew
L. Newton. Additionally, this document incorporates work on DNR
responses in JSON by Ning Kong, Linlin Zhou, Jiagui Xie, and Sean
Shen.
The components of the DNR object classes are derived from a
categorization of WHOIS response formats created by Ning Kong, Linlin
Zhou, Guangqing Deng, Steve Sheng, Francisco Arias, Ray Bellis, and
Frederico Neves.
Tom Harrison, Murray Kucherawy, Ed Lewis, Audric Schiltknecht, Naoki
Kambe, Maarten Bosteels, Mario Loffredo, and Jasdip Singh contributed
significant review comments and provided clarifying text. James
Mitchell provided text regarding the processing of unknown JSON
attributes and identified issues leading to the remodeling of events.
Ernie Dainow and Francisco Obispo provided concrete suggestions that
led to a better variant model for domain names.
Ernie Dainow provided the background information on the secure DNS * Addressed known errata.
attributes and objects for domains, informative text on DNSSEC, and
many other attributes that appear throughout the object classes of
this document.
The switch to and incorporation of jCard was performed by Simon * Updated references to 7482 to RFC 9082. Adjusted case of "xxxx"
Perreault. used in examples where "XXXX" was previously used, and removed an
"X" from "XXXXX". Changed IPv6 address example using "C00" to
"c00". Added "a string representing" to the definitions of
startAddress and endAddress. Removed "entity" from "Autonomous
System Number Entity Object Class". Added "an unsigned 32-bit
integer" to the definition of startAutnum and endAutnum. Added "a
string representing" to the definition of name in the IP network
and ASN object classes. Clarified rdapConformance identifier
registration expectations in Section 4.1. Changed
"lunarNic_level_0" to "lunarNIC_level_0".
Olaf Kolkman and Murray Kucherawy chaired the IETF's WEIRDS working * Clarified that the "value", "rel" and "href" JSON values MUST be
group from which this document was originally created. James Galvin specified in the "links" array.
and Antoin Verschuren chaired the REGEXT working group that worked on
the -bis version.
Changes from RFC 7483 * Clarified that the "description" array is required in the Notices
and Remarks data structures and other values are OPTIONAL.
00: Initial version ported from RFC 7483. Addressed known errata. * Noted that all members of the "events" and "Public IDs" arrays are
Added Implementation Status section. REQUIRED.
01: Updated references to 7482 to 7482bis Internet-Draft. Updated * Fix "self" link values in examples. Changed "http" to "https"
"Change Log" to "Changes from RFC 7483". Added APNIC
implementation status. Adjusted case of "xxxx" used in examples
where "XXXX" was previously used, and removed an "X" from "XXXXX".
Changed IPv6 address example using "C00" to "c00". Added "a
string representing" to the definitions of startAddress and
endAddress. Removed "entity" from "Autonomous System Number
Entity Object Class". Added "an unsigned 32-bit integer" to the
definition of startAutnum and endAutnum. Added "a string
representing" to the definition of name in the IP network and ASN
object classes. Clarified rdapConformance identifier registration
expectations in Section 4.1. Changed "lunarNic_level_0" to
"lunarNIC_level_0". Clarified that the "value", "rel" and "href"
JSON values MUST be specified in the "links" array. Clarified
that the "description" array is required in the Notices and
Remarks data structures and other values are OPTIONAL. Noted that
all members of the "events" and "Public IDs" arrays are REQUIRED.
Fix "self" link values in examples. Changed "http" to "https"
link values in examples. Noted that Figure 18 is an example of a link values in examples. Noted that Figure 18 is an example of a
nameserver object with all "appropriate" values given. In nameserver object with all "appropriate" values given. In
appendix C, quoted the word "label" in "label attribute". Added Appendix C, quoted the word "label" in "label attribute". Added
reference to "status" definition in the descriptions for IP reference to "status" definition in the descriptions for IP
networks and autnums. Fixed a 404 for the informative reference networks and autnums. Fixed a 404 for the informative reference
to "The Stealthy Ascendancy of JSON". Added "boolean" to the to "The Stealthy Ascendancy of JSON". Added "boolean" to the
definition of zoneSigned. Clarified REQUIRED and OPTIONAL members definition of zoneSigned.
of the "events" array. Changed "SHOULD not" to "SHOULD NOT" in
Section 5. Updated normative references (5226-8126, 5988-8288,
7159-8259). Changed examples using "ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example" to
split URLs to avoid long lines.
00: Initial working group version. Added acknowledgments. * Clarified REQUIRED and OPTIONAL members of the "events" array.
01: Changed "The "lang" attribute may appear anywhere in an object * Changed "SHOULD not" to "SHOULD NOT" in Section 5.
* Updated normative references (RFC 5226 to RFC 8126, RFC 5988 to
RFC 8288, RFC 7159 to RFC 8259). Changed examples using "ns1.xn--
fo-5ja.example" to split URLs to avoid long lines.
* Added acknowledgments.
* Changed "The "lang" attribute may appear anywhere in an object
class or data structure except for in jCard objects" to "The class or data structure except for in jCard objects" to "The
"lang" attribute as defined in this section MAY appear anywhere in "lang" attribute as defined in this section MAY appear anywhere in
an object class or data structure, except for in jCard objects. an object class or data structure, except for in jCard objects.
jCard supports similar functionality by way of the LANGUAGE jCard supports similar functionality by way of the LANGUAGE
property parameter (see Section 5.1 of RFC 6350 [RFC6350]". property parameter (see Section 5.1 of RFC 6350 [RFC6350]".
Changed "simple data types conveyed in JSON strings" to "simple
* Changed "simple data types conveyed in JSON strings" to "simple
data types conveyed in JSON primitive types (strings, numbers, data types conveyed in JSON primitive types (strings, numbers,
booleans, and null)". Changed "In other words, servers are free booleans, and null)". Changed "In other words, servers are free
to not include JSON members containing registration data based on to not include JSON members containing registration data based on
their own policies" to "In other words, servers are free to omit their own policies" to "In other words, servers are free to omit
unrequired/optional JSON members containing registration data unrequired/optional JSON members containing registration data
based on their own policies". Changed "This data structure based on their own policies".
appears only in the topmost JSON object of a response" to "This
data structure MUST appear in the topmost JSON object of a * Changed "This data structure appears only in the topmost JSON
response". Changed "Some non-answer responses may return entity object of a response" to "This data structure MUST appear in the
bodies with information that could be more descriptive" to "Some topmost JSON object of a response".
non-answer responses MAY return entity bodies with information
that could be more descriptive". Changed "The basic structure of * Changed "Some non-answer responses may return entity bodies with
that response is an object class containing an error code number information that could be more descriptive" to "Some non-answer
(corresponding to the HTTP response code) followed by a string responses MAY return entity bodies with information that could be
named "title" and an array of strings named "description"" to "The more descriptive".
basic structure of that response is an object class containing a
REQUIRED error code number (corresponding to the HTTP response * Changed "The basic structure of that response is an object class
code) followed by an OPTIONAL string named "title" and an OPTIONAL containing an error code number (corresponding to the HTTP
array of strings named "description"". Changed the "Autonomous response code) followed by a string named "title" and an array of
System Number Object Class" section title to "The Autonomous strings named "description"" to "The basic structure of that
System Number Object Class" for consistency with other section response is an object class containing a REQUIRED error code
titles. Removed trailing periods in the "Terminology and number (corresponding to the HTTP response code) followed by an
Definitions" section for consistency. Changed instances of OPTIONAL string named "title" and an OPTIONAL array of strings
"lunarNic" to "lunarNIC" for consistency. Removed an extraneous named "description"".
trailing period after the eventDate description. Changed a "." to
";" in the description of the "network" member of the domain * Changed the "Autonomous System Number Object Class" section title
object class. Changed "The high-level structure of the autnum to "The Autonomous System Number Object Class" for consistency
object class consists of information about the network with other section titles. Removed trailing periods in the
"Terminology and Definitions" section for consistency. Changed
instances of "lunarNic" to "lunarNIC" for consistency. Removed an
extraneous trailing period after the eventDate description.
Changed a "." to ";" in the description of the "network" member of
the domain object class. Changed "The high-level structure of the
autnum object class consists of information about the network
registration" to "The high-level structure of the autnum object registration" to "The high-level structure of the autnum object
class consists of information about the autonomous system number class consists of information about the Autonomous System number
registration". Changed "registry unique" to "registry-unique". registration". Changed "registry unique" to "registry-unique".
02: Changed "registrant" to "registrar" in the description of the * Changed "registrant" to "registrar" in the description of the
"transfer" event action to address erratum 6158. Added IANA "transfer" event action to address erratum 6158. Added IANA
instructions to correct the description of the value in the instructions to correct the description of the value in the
registry. Added text to Section 4.2 to note that "self" and registry.
"related" "href" URIs MUST NOT be the same. Added text to
Section 4.2 to describe return of IDNs in LDH name format.
03: Added text to note that the "fn" member of a contact object MAY * Added text to Section 4.2 to note that "self" and "related" "href"
be empty in Section 3. URIs MUST NOT be the same.
04: Added text to clarify rdapConformance requirements in * Added text to Section 4.2 to describe return of IDNs in LDH name
Section 4.1. format.
* Added text to note that the "fn" member of a contact object MAY be
empty in Section 3.
* Added text to clarify rdapConformance requirements in Section 4.1.
* Added "obsoletes 7483" to the headers, Abstract, and Introduction.
Updated BCP 14 boilerplate. Updated IANA Considerations to note
that this RFC (a product of the REGEXT Working Group) replaces RFC
7483. Changed "simple string" to "simple character string" in
Sections 3 and 4.7. Clarified requirement for the "fn" member in
Section 3. Modified the requirement for rdapConformance placement
in Section 4.1. Changed "jCard" to "vCard" LANGUAGE property
reference in Section 4.4. Changed "no use" to "little or no use"
in Section 5.1. Added example line wrap note in Section 5.2.
Modified the definition of "idnTable" in Section 5.3. Modified
the dsData and keyData examples in Section 5.3. Changed
"2001:c00::/23" to "2001:db8::/32" in Section 5.4. Expanded the
definition of "type" in Sections 5.4 and 5.5. Modified example
autnums in Section 5.5. Added text to the Security Considerations
section to note that DNSSEC information returned in a response
cannot be trusted directly.
Acknowledgments
This document is derived from original work on RIR responses in JSON
by Byron J. Ellacott, Arturo L. Servin, Kaveh Ranjbar, and Andrew L.
Newton. Additionally, this document incorporates work on DNR
responses in JSON by Ning Kong, Linlin Zhou, Jiagui Xie, and Sean
Shen.
The components of the DNR object classes are derived from a
categorization of WHOIS response formats created by Ning Kong, Linlin
Zhou, Guangqing Deng, Steve Sheng, Francisco Arias, Ray Bellis, and
Frederico Neves.
Tom Harrison, Murray Kucherawy, Ed Lewis, Audric Schiltknecht, Naoki
Kambe, Maarten Bosteels, Mario Loffredo, and Jasdip Singh contributed
significant review comments and provided clarifying text. James
Mitchell provided text regarding the processing of unknown JSON
attributes and identified issues leading to the remodeling of events.
Ernie Dainow and Francisco Obispo provided concrete suggestions that
led to a better variant model for domain names.
Ernie Dainow provided the background information on the secure DNS
attributes and objects for domains, informative text on DNSSEC, and
many other attributes that appear throughout the object classes of
this document.
The switch to and incorporation of jCard was performed by Simon
Perreault.
Olaf Kolkman and Murray Kucherawy chaired the IETF's WEIRDS Working
Group from which this document was originally created. James Galvin
and Antoin Verschuren chaired the REGEXT Working Group that worked on
this document.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Scott Hollenbeck Scott Hollenbeck
Verisign Labs Verisign Labs
12061 Bluemont Way 12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190 Reston, VA 20190
United States United States of America
Email: shollenbeck@verisign.com Email: shollenbeck@verisign.com
URI: https://www.verisignlabs.com/ URI: https://www.verisignlabs.com/
Andy Newton Andy Newton
Amazon Web Services, Inc. Amazon Web Services, Inc.
13200 Woodland Park Road 13200 Woodland Park Road
Herndon, VA 20171 Herndon, VA 20171
United States of America United States of America
 End of changes. 178 change blocks. 
882 lines changed or deleted 624 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/