A few comments, mostly nits: Comment 1 --------- Section 1. ## The registration data expected to be presented by this service is ## Internet resource registration data - registration of domain names ## and Internet number resources. These data is typically provided by Nit: ''These data is'': Perhaps - remove the ‘’The'' to start the paragraph and then ''Such data are'' for the Nit. (Treat ‘’data'' consistently as singular or plural.) Comment 2 --------- Section 3. Nit: ''meant to return only one path of execution'' - perhaps ''follow one path''? Comment 3 --------- Section 5.6. Nit: ''As the use of RDAP is for public resources'' is a judgement call. Suggest rewording as ''When RDAP is for public resources, a value of ‘*’. . .'' Comment 4 --------- Section 6. Slight discomfort: I suppose this is not internationalizable given the nature of the programming tools being ASCII-based. So no formal objection, but a desire to allow identifiers to be able to break out of a ASCII-only set ''is a pony I'd like to have.'' No suggested change, but curious ... if ... Comment 5 --------- Section 7. Nit: ''It does require the RDAP clients MUST support HTTPS.'' Nit: ''This document made'' should be ''This document makes'' Comment 6 --------- Section 8.1 Addition to third paragraph: Suggestion: ''For documentation in other than the RFC series, IANA is requested to hold in escrow copies of the documentation.'' (This was needed for a DNS RR type defined in an ATM Forum document.) Comment 7 --------- Appendix B Nit: ''this is unlikely to have any known side effects'' - suggest ''this will be[/ought to be] compatible with the RDAP definition.''
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>