[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-ietf-weirds...] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Errata]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Errata Exist
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         A. Newton
Request for Comments: 7483                                          ARIN
Category: Standards Track                                  S. Hollenbeck
ISSN: 2070-1721                                            Verisign Labs
                                                              March 2015


    JSON Responses for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)

Abstract

   This document describes JSON data structures representing
   registration information maintained by Regional Internet Registries
   (RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs).  These data structures are
   used to form Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) query
   responses.

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7483.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 1]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Terminology and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Data Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Use of JSON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  Naming  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Common Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  Common Data Structures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.1.  RDAP Conformance  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.2.  Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.3.  Notices and Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.4.  Language Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.5.  Events  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.6.  Status  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     4.7.  Port 43 WHOIS Server  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     4.8.  Public IDs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     4.9.  Object Class Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     4.10. An Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   5.  Object Classes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.1.  The Entity Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     5.2.  The Nameserver Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     5.3.  The Domain Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     5.4.  The IP Network Object Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  38
     5.5.  Autonomous System Number Entity Object Class  . . . . . .  42
   6.  Error Response Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
   7.  Responding to Help Queries  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  48
   8.  Responding To Searches  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  48
   9.  Indicating Truncated Responses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  49
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  52
     10.1.  RDAP JSON Media Type Registration  . . . . . . . . . . .  52
     10.2.  JSON Values Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  53
       10.2.1.  Notice and Remark Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
       10.2.2.  Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
       10.2.3.  Event Actions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  49
       10.2.4.  Roles  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  61
       10.2.5.  Variant Relations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  63
   11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  64
   12. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . .  64
     12.1.  Character Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  64
     12.2.  URIs and IRIs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  64
     12.3.  Language Tags  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  64
     12.4.  Internationalized Domain Names . . . . . . . . . . . . .  65
   13. Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  65
   14. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  65
     14.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  65
     14.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  67




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 2]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   Appendix A.  Suggested Data Modeling with the Entity Object Class  68
     A.1.  Registrants and Contacts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  68
     A.2.  Registrars  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  70
   Appendix B.  Modeling Events  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  72
   Appendix C.  Structured vs. Unstructured Addresses  . . . . . . .  74
   Appendix D.  Secure DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  76
   Appendix E.  Motivations for Using JSON . . . . . . . . . . . . .  77
   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  77
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  78

1.  Introduction

   This document describes responses in the JSON [RFC7159] format for
   the queries as defined by the Registration Data Access Protocol Query
   Format [RFC7482].  A communication protocol for exchanging queries
   and responses is described in [RFC7480].

1.1.  Terminology and Definitions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] when
   specified in their uppercase forms.

   The following list describes terminology and definitions used
   throughout this document:

   DNR:              Domain Name Registry

   LDH:              letters, digits, hyphen

   member:           data found within an object as defined by JSON
                     [RFC7159].

   object:           a data structure as defined by JSON [RFC7159].

   object class:     the definition of members that may be found in JSON
                     objects described in this document.

   object instance:  an instantiation or specific instance of an object
                     class.

   RDAP:             Registration Data Access Protocol

   RIR:              Regional Internet Registry






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 3]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


1.2.  Data Model

   The data model for JSON responses is specified in five sections:

   1.  simple data types conveyed in JSON strings

   2.  data structures specified as JSON arrays or objects that are used
       repeatedly when building up larger objects

   3.  object classes representing structured data corresponding to a
       lookup of a single object

   4.  arrays of objects representing structured data corresponding to a
       search for multiple objects

   5.  the response to an error

   The object classes represent responses for two major categories of
   data: responses returned by RIRs for registration data related to IP
   addresses, reverse DNS names, and Autonomous System numbers and
   responses returned by DNRs for registration data related to forward
   DNS names.  The following object classes are returned by both RIRs
   and DNRs:

   1.  domains

   2.  nameservers

   3.  entities

   The information served by both RIRs and DNRs for these object classes
   overlap extensively and are given in this document as a unified model
   for both classes of service.

   In addition to the object classes listed above, RIRs also serve the
   following object classes:

   1.  IP networks

   2.  Autonomous System numbers

   Object classes defined in this document represent a minimal set of
   what a compliant client/server needs to understand to function
   correctly; however, some deployments may want to include additional
   object classes to suit individual needs.  Anticipating this need for
   extension, Section 2.1 of this document defines a mechanism for
   extending the JSON objects that are described in this document.




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 4]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   Positive responses take two forms.  A response to a lookup of a
   single object in the registration system yields a JSON object, which
   is the subject of the lookup.  A response to a search for multiple
   objects yields a JSON object that contains an array of JSON objects
   that are the subject of the search.  In each type of response, other
   data structures are present within the topmost JSON object.

2.  Use of JSON

2.1.  Naming

   Clients of these JSON responses SHOULD ignore unrecognized JSON
   members in responses.  Servers can insert members into the JSON
   responses, which are not specified in this document, but that does
   not constitute an error in the response.  Servers that insert such
   unspecified members into JSON responses SHOULD have member names
   prefixed with a short identifier followed by an underscore followed
   by a meaningful name.  It has been observed that these short
   identifiers aid software implementers with identifying the
   specification of the JSON member, and failure to use one could cause
   an implementer to assume the server is erroneously using a name from
   this specification.  This allowance does not apply to jCard [RFC7095]
   objects.  The full JSON name (the prefix plus the underscore plus the
   meaningful name) SHOULD adhere to the character and name limitations
   of the prefix registry described in [RFC7480].  Failure to use these
   limitations could result in slower adoption as these limitations have
   been observed to aid some client programming models.

   Consider the following JSON response with JSON members, all of which
   are specified in this document.

   {
     "handle" : "ABC123",
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 1





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 5]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   If The Registry of the Moon desires to express information not found
   in this specification, it might select "lunarNic" as its identifying
   prefix and insert, as an example, the member named
   "lunarNic_beforeOneSmallStep" to signify registrations occurring
   before the first moon landing and the member named
   "lunarNic_harshMistressNotes" that contains other descriptive text.

   Consider the following JSON response with JSON names, some of which
   should be ignored by clients without knowledge of their meaning.

   {
     "handle" : "ABC123",
     "lunarNic_beforeOneSmallStep" : "TRUE THAT!",
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],
     "lunarNic_harshMistressNotes" :
     [
       "In space,",
       "nobody can hear you scream."
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 2

   Insertion of unrecognized members ignored by clients may also be used
   for future revisions to this specification.

   Clients processing JSON responses need to be prepared for members
   representing registration data specified in this document to be
   absent from a response.  In other words, servers are free to not
   include JSON members containing registration data based on their own
   policies.

   Finally, all JSON names specified in this document are case
   sensitive.  Both servers and clients MUST transmit and process them
   using the specified character case.







Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 6]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


3.  Common Data Types

   JSON [RFC7159] defines the data types of a number, character string,
   boolean, array, object, and null.  This section describes the
   semantics and/or syntax reference for common, JSON character strings
   used in this document.

   handle:           DNRs and RIRs have registry-unique identifiers that
                     may be used to specifically reference an object
                     instance.  The semantics of this data type as found
                     in this document are to be a registry-unique
                     reference to the closest enclosing object where the
                     value is found.  The data type names "registryId",
                     "roid", "nic-handle", "registrationNo", etc., are
                     terms often synonymous with this data type.  In
                     this document, the term "handle" is used.  The term
                     exposed to users by clients is a presentation issue
                     beyond the scope of this document.

   IPv4 addresses:   The representation of IPv4 addresses in this
                     document uses the dotted-decimal notation.  An
                     example of this textual representation is
                     "192.0.2.0".

   IPv6 addresses:   The representation of IPv6 addresses in this
                     document follow the forms outlined in [RFC5952].
                     An example of this textual representation is
                     "2001:db8::1:0:0:1".

   country codes:    Where the identity of a geopolitical nation or
                     country is needed, these identities are represented
                     with the alpha-2 or two-character country code
                     designation as defined in [ISO.3166.1988].  The
                     alpha-2 representation is used because it is freely
                     available, whereas the alpha-3 and numeric-3
                     standards are not.

   LDH names:        Textual representations of DNS names where the
                     labels of the domain are all "letters, digits,
                     hyphen" labels as described by [RFC5890].  Trailing
                     periods are optional.

   Unicode names:    Textual representations of DNS names where one or
                     more of the labels are U-labels as described by
                     [RFC5890].  Trailing periods are optional.

   dates and times:  The syntax for values denoting dates and times is
                     defined in [RFC3339].



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 7]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   URIs:             The syntax for values denoting a Uniform Resource
                     Identifier (URI) is defined by [RFC3986].

   Contact information is defined using jCards as described in
   [RFC7095].

4.  Common Data Structures

   This section defines common data structures used in responses and
   object classes.

4.1.  RDAP Conformance

   The data structure named "rdapConformance" is an array of strings,
   each providing a hint as to the specifications used in the
   construction of the response.  This data structure appears only in
   the topmost JSON object of a response.

   An example rdapConformance data structure:

   "rdapConformance" :
   [
     "rdap_level_0"
   ]

                                 Figure 3

   The string literal "rdap_level_0" signifies conformance with this
   specification.  When custom JSON values are inserted into responses,
   conformance to those custom specifications MUST use a string prefixed
   with the appropriate identifier from the IANA RDAP Extensions
   registry specified in [RFC7480].  For example, if the fictional
   Registry of the Moon wants to signify that their JSON responses are
   conformant with their registered extensions, the string used might be
   "lunarNIC_level_0".  These prefixes aid the identification of
   specifications for software implementers, and failure to use them
   could result in slower adoption of extensions.

   Example rdapConformance structure with custom extensions noted:

   "rdapConformance" :
   [
     "rdap_level_0",
     "lunarNic_level_0"
   ]

                                 Figure 4




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 8]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


4.2.  Links

   The "links" array is found in data structures to signify links to
   other resources on the Internet.  The relationship of these links is
   defined by the IANA registry described by [RFC5988].

   The following is an example of the link structure:

       {
         "value" : "http://example.com/context_uri",
         "rel" : "self",
         "href" : "http://example.com/target_uri",
         "hreflang" : [ "en", "ch" ],
         "title" : "title",
         "media" : "screen",
         "type" : "application/json"
       }

                                 Figure 5

   The JSON name/values of "rel", "href", "hreflang", "title", "media",
   and "type" correspond to values found in Section 5 of [RFC5988].  The
   "value" JSON value is the context URI as described by [RFC5988].  The
   "href" JSON value MUST be specified.  All other JSON values are
   OPTIONAL.

   This is an example of the "links" array as it might be found in an
   object class:

       "links" :
       [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.com/ip/2001:db8::123",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.com/ip/2001:db8::123",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           },
           {
             "value" : "http://example.com/ip/2001:db8::123",
             "rel" : "up",
             "href" : "http://example.com/ip/2001:db8::/48",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }

       ]

                                 Figure 6




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                    [Page 9]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


4.3.  Notices and Remarks

   The "notices" and "remarks" data structures take the same form.  The
   notices structure denotes information about the service providing
   RDAP information and/or information about the entire response,
   whereas the remarks structure denotes information about the object
   class that contains it (see Section 5 regarding object classes).

   Both are arrays of objects.  Each object contains an optional "title"
   string representing the title of the object, an optional "type"
   string denoting a registered type of remark or notice (see
   Section 10.2.1), an array of strings named "description" for the
   purposes of conveying any descriptive text, and an optional "links"
   array as described in Section 4.2.

   An example of the notices data structure:

   "notices" :
   [
     {
       "title" : "Terms of Use",
       "description" :
       [
         "Service subject to The Registry of the Moon's TOS.",
         "Copyright (c) 2020 LunarNIC"
       ],
       "links" :
       [
         {
           "value" : "http://example.net/entity/XXXX",
           "rel" : "alternate",
           "type" : "text/html",
           "href" : "http://www.example.com/terms_of_use.html"
         }
       ]
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 7

   It is the job of the clients to determine line breaks, spacing, and
   display issues for sentences within the character strings of the
   "description" array.  Each string in the "description" array contains
   a single complete division of human-readable text indicating to
   clients where there are semantic breaks.






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 10]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   An example of the remarks data structure:

   "remarks" :
   [
     {
       "description" :
       [
         "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
         "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
       ]
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 8

   Note that objects in the "remarks" array may also have a "links"
   array.

   While the "title" and "description" fields are intended primarily for
   human consumption, the "type" string contains a well-known value to
   be registered with IANA (see Section 10.2.1) for programmatic use.

   An example of the remarks data structure:

   "remarks" :
   [
     {
       "type" : "object truncated due to authorization",
       "description" :
       [
         "Some registration data may not have been given.",
         "Use proper authorization credentials to see all of it."
       ]
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 9

   While the "remarks" array will appear in many object classes in a
   response, the "notices" array appears only in the topmost object of a
   response.










Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 11]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


4.4.  Language Identifier

   This data structure consists solely of a name/value pair, where the
   name is "lang" and the value is a string containing a language
   identifier as described in [RFC5646].

   "lang" : "mn-Cyrl-MN"

                                 Figure 10

   The "lang" attribute may appear anywhere in an object class or data
   structure except for in jCard objects.

4.5.  Events

   This data structure represents events that have occurred on an
   instance of an object class (see Section 5 regarding object classes).

   This is an example of an "events" array.

   "events" :
   [
     {
       "eventAction" : "registration",
       "eventActor" : "SOMEID-LUNARNIC",
       "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
     },
     {
       "eventAction" : "last changed",
       "eventActor" : "OTHERID-LUNARNIC",
       "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 11

   The "events" array consists of objects, each with the following
   members:

   o  "eventAction" -- a string denoting the reason for the event

   o  "eventActor" -- an optional identifier denoting the actor
      responsible for the event

   o  "eventDate" -- a string containing the time and date the event
      occurred.

   o  "links" -- see Section 4.2



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 12]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   Events can be future dated.  One use case for future dating of events
   is to denote when an object expires from a registry.

   The "links" array in this data structure is provided for references
   to the event actor.  In order to reference an RDAP entity, a "rel" of
   "related" and a "type" of "application/rdap+json" is used in the link
   reference.

   See Section 10.2.3 for a list of values for the "eventAction" string.
   See Appendix B regarding the various ways events can be modeled.

4.6.  Status

   This data structure, named "status", is an array of strings
   indicating the state of a registered object (see Section 10.2.2 for a
   list of values).

4.7.  Port 43 WHOIS Server

   This data structure, a member named "port43", is a simple string
   containing the fully qualified host name or IP address of the WHOIS
   [RFC3912] server where the containing object instance may be found.
   Note that this is not a URI, as there is no WHOIS URI scheme.

4.8.  Public IDs

   This data structure maps a public identifier to an object class.  It
   is named "publicIds" and is an array of objects, with each object
   containing the following members:

   o  type -- a string denoting the type of public identifier

   o  identifier -- a public identifier of the type denoted by "type"

   The following is an example of a publicIds structure.

   "publicIds":
   [
     {
       "type":"IANA Registrar ID",
       "identifier":"1"
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 12






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 13]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


4.9.  Object Class Name

   This data structure, a member named "objectClassName", gives the
   object class name of a particular object as a string.  This
   identifies the type of object being processed.  An objectClassName is
   REQUIRED in all RDAP response objects so that the type of the object
   can be interpreted.

4.10.  An Example

   This is an example response with both rdapConformance and notices
   embedded:

   {
     "rdapConformance" :
     [
       "rdap_level_0"
     ],
     "notices" :
     [
       {
         "title" : "Content Removed",
         "description" :
         [
           "Without full authorization, content has been removed.",
           "Sorry, dude!"
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/ip/192.0.2.0/24",
             "rel" : "alternate",
             "type" : "text/html",
             "href" : "http://www.example.com/redaction_policy.html"
           }
         ]
       }
     ],
     "lang" : "en",
     "objectClassName" : "ip network",
     "startAddress" : "192.0.2.0",
     "endAddress" : "192.0.2.255",
     "handle" : "XXXX-RIR",
     "ipVersion" : "v4",
     "name": "NET-RTR-1",
     "parentHandle" : "YYYY-RIR",
     "remarks" :
     [



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 14]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 13

5.  Object Classes

   Object classes represent structures appropriate for a response from
   the queries specified in [RFC7482].

   Each object class contains a "links" array as specified in
   Section 4.2.  For every object class instance in a response, whether
   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
   a search result set, servers SHOULD provide a link representing a URI
   for that object class instance using the "self" relationship as
   described in the IANA registry specified by [RFC5988].  As explained
   in Section 5.2, this may be not always be possible for nameserver
   data.  Clients MUST be able to process object instances without a
   self link.  When present, clients can use the self link for caching
   data.  Servers MAY provide more than one self link for any given
   object instance.  Failure to provide any self link by a server may
   result in clients being unable to cache object class instances.

   Clients using self links for caching SHOULD not cache any object
   class instances where the authority of the self link is different
   than the authority of the server returning the data.  Failing to do
   so might result in cache poisoning.

   Self links MUST contain a "type" element containing the "application/
   rdap+json" media type when referencing RDAP object instances as
   defined by this document.












Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 15]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   This is an example of the "links" array with a self link to an object
   class:

       "links" :
       [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.com/ip/2001:db8::123",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.com/ip/2001:db8::123",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
       ]

                                 Figure 14

5.1.  The Entity Object Class

   The entity object class appears throughout this document and is an
   appropriate response for the /entity/XXXX query defined in
   "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Format" [RFC7482].
   This object class represents the information of organizations,
   corporations, governments, non-profits, clubs, individual persons,
   and informal groups of people.  All of these representations are so
   similar that it is best to represent them in JSON [RFC7159] with one
   construct, the entity object class, to aid in the reuse of code by
   implementers.

   The entity object class uses jCard [RFC7095] to represent contact
   information, such as postal addresses, email addresses, phone numbers
   and names of organizations and individuals.  Many of the types of
   information that can be represented with jCard have no use in RDAP,
   such as birthdays, anniversaries, and gender.

   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.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "entity",
     "handle":"XXXX",
     "vcardArray":[
       "vcard",
       [
         ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
         ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
         ["n", {}, "text",
           ["User", "Joe", "", "", ["ing. jr", "M.Sc."]]
         ],
         ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 16]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


         ["lang", {
           "pref":"1"
         }, "language-tag", "fr"],
         ["lang", {
           "pref":"2"
         }, "language-tag", "en"],
         ["org", {
           "type":"work"
         }, "text", "Example"],
         ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
         ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
         ["adr",
           { "type":"work" },
           "text",
           [
             "",
             "Suite 1234",
             "4321 Rue Somewhere",
             "Quebec",
             "QC",
             "G1V 2M2",
             "Canada"
           ]
         ],
         ["adr",
           {
             "type":"home",
             "label":"123 Maple Ave\nSuite 90001\nVancouver\nBC\n1239\n"
           },
           "text",
           [
             "", "", "", "", "", "", ""
           ]
         ],
         ["tel",
           {
             "type":["work", "voice"],
             "pref":"1"
           },
           "uri",
           "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
         ],
         ["tel",
           { "type":["work", "cell", "voice", "video", "text"] },
           "uri",
           "tel:+1-555-555-4321"
         ],
         ["email",



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 17]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


           { "type":"work" },
           "text",
           "joe.user@example.com"
         ],
         ["geo", {
           "type":"work"
         }, "uri", "geo:46.772673,-71.282945"],
         ["key",
           { "type":"work" },
           "uri",
           "http://www.example.com/joe.user/joe.asc"
         ],
         ["tz", {},
           "utc-offset", "-05:00"],
         ["url", { "type":"home" },
           "uri", "http://example.org"]
       ]
     ],
     "roles":[ "registrar" ],
     "publicIds":[
       {
         "type":"IANA Registrar ID",
         "identifier":"1"
       }
     ],
     "remarks":[
       {
         "description":[
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],
     "links":[
       {
         "value":"http://example.com/entity/XXXX",
         "rel":"self",
         "href":"http://example.com/entity/XXXX",
         "type" : "application/rdap+json"
       }
     ],
     "events":[
       {
         "eventAction":"registration",
         "eventDate":"1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       }
     ],
     "asEventActor":[



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 18]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


       {
         "eventAction":"last changed",
         "eventDate":"1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 15

   The entity object class can contain the following members:

   o  objectClassName -- the string "entity"

   o  handle -- a string representing a registry unique identifier of
      the entity

   o  vcardArray -- a jCard with the entity's contact information

   o  roles -- an array of strings, each signifying the relationship an
      object would have with its closest containing object (see
      Section 10.2.4 for a list of values)

   o  publicIds -- see Section 4.8

   o  entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by this section

   o  remarks -- see Section 4.3

   o  links -- see Section 4.2

   o  events -- see Section 4.5

   o  asEventActor -- this data structure takes the same form as the
      events data structure (see Section 4.5), but each object in the
      array MUST NOT have an "eventActor" member.  These objects denote
      that the entity is an event actor for the given events.  See
      Appendix B regarding the various ways events can be modeled.

   o  status -- see Section 4.6

   o  port43 -- see Section 4.7

   o  networks -- an array of IP network objects as defined in
      Section 5.4

   o  autnums -- an array of autnum objects as defined in Section 5.5





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 19]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   Entities may also have other entities embedded with them in an array.
   This can be used to model an organization with specific individuals
   fulfilling designated roles of responsibility.

   The following is an elided example of an entity with embedded
   entities.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "entity",
     "handle" : "ANENTITY",
     "roles" : [ "registrar" ],
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle": "ANEMBEDDEDENTITY",
         "roles" : [ "technical" ],
         ...
       },
       ...
     ],
     ...
   }

                                 Figure 16

   The following is an example of an entity that might be served by a
   DNR.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "entity",
     "handle":"XXXX",
     "vcardArray":[
       "vcard",
       [
         ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
         ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
         ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
         ["lang", {
           "pref":"1"
         }, "language-tag", "fr"],
         ["lang", {
           "pref":"2"
         }, "language-tag", "en"],
         ["org", {
           "type":"work"
         }, "text", "Example"],



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 20]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


         ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
         ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
         ["adr",
           { "type":"work" },
           "text",
           [
             "",
             "Suite 1234",
             "4321 Rue Somewhere",
             "Quebec",
             "QC",
             "G1V 2M2",
             "Canada"
           ]
         ],
         ["tel",
           { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
           "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
         ],
         ["email",
           { "type":"work" },
           "text", "joe.user@example.com"
         ]
       ]
     ],
     "status":[ "validated", "locked" ],
     "remarks":[
       {
         "description":[
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],
     "links":[
       {
         "value":"http://example.com/entity/XXXX",
         "rel":"self",
         "href":"http://example.com/entity/XXXX",
         "type":"application/rdap+json"
       }
     ],
     "port43":"whois.example.net",
     "events":[
       {
         "eventAction":"registration",
         "eventDate":"1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       },



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 21]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


       {
         "eventAction":"last changed",
         "eventDate":"1991-12-31T23:59:59Z",
         "eventActor":"joe@example.com"
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 17

   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
   regarding structured vs.  unstructured postal addresses in entities.

5.2.  The Nameserver Object Class

   The nameserver object class represents information regarding DNS
   nameservers used in both forward and reverse DNS.  RIRs and some DNRs
   register or expose nameserver information as an attribute of a domain
   name, while other DNRs model nameservers as "first class objects".

   The nameserver object class accommodates both models and degrees of
   variation in between.

   The following is an example of a nameserver object.


























Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 22]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


     {
       "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
       "handle" : "XXXX",
       "ldhName" : "ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example",
       "unicodeName" : "ns1.foo.example",
       "status" : [ "active" ],
       "ipAddresses" :
       {
         "v4": [ "192.0.2.1", "192.0.2.2" ],
         "v6": [ "2001:db8::123" ]
       },
       "remarks" :
       [
         {
           "description" :
           [
             "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
             "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
           ]
         }
       ],
       "links" :
       [
         {
           "value" : "http://example.net/nameserver/xxxx",
           "rel" : "self",
           "href" : "http://example.net/nameserver/xxxx",
           "type" : "application/rdap+json"
         }
       ],
       "port43" : "whois.example.net",
       "events" :
       [
         {
           "eventAction" : "registration",
           "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
         },
         {
           "eventAction" : "last changed",
           "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z",
           "eventActor" : "joe@example.com"
         }
       ]
     }


                                 Figure 18




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 23]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   Figure 18 is an example of a nameserver object with all values given.
   Registries using a first-class nameserver data model would embed this
   in domain objects as well as allowing references to it with the
   "/nameserver" query type (all depending on the registry operators
   policy).  Other registries may pare back the information as needed.
   Figure 19 is an example of a nameserver object as would be found in
   RIRs and some DNRs, while Figure 20 is an example of a nameserver
   object as would be found in other DNRs.

   The following is an example of the simplest nameserver object:

     {
       "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
       "ldhName" : "ns1.example.com"
     }

                                 Figure 19

   The following is an example of a simple nameserver object that might
   be commonly used by DNRs:

     {
       "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
       "ldhName" : "ns1.example.com",
       "ipAddresses" : { "v6" : [ "2001:db8::123", "2001:db8::124" ] }
     }

                                 Figure 20

   As nameservers can be modeled by some registries to be first-class
   objects, they may also have an array of entities (Section 5.1)
   embedded to signify parties responsible for the maintenance,
   registrations, etc., of the nameservers.

   The following is an elided example of a nameserver with embedded
   entities.















Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 24]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   {
     "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
     "handle" : "XXXX",
     "ldhName" : "ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example",
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       ...
     ],
     ...
   }

                                 Figure 21

   The nameserver object class can contain the following members:

   o  objectClassName -- the string "nameserver"

   o  handle -- a string representing a registry unique identifier of
      the nameserver

   o  ldhName -- a string containing the LDH name of the nameserver (see
      Section 3)

   o  unicodeName -- a string containing a DNS Unicode name of the
      nameserver (see Section 3)

   o  ipAddresses -- an object containing the following members:

      *  v6 -- an array of strings containing IPv6 addresses of the
         nameserver

      *  v4 -- an array of strings containing IPv4 addresses of the
         nameserver

   o  entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1

   o  status -- see Section 4.6

   o  remarks -- see Section 4.3

   o  links -- see Section 4.2

   o  port43 -- see Section 4.7

   o  events -- see Section 4.5





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 25]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


5.3.  The Domain Object Class

   The domain object class represents a DNS name and point of
   delegation.  For RIRs, these delegation points are in the reverse DNS
   tree, whereas for DNRs, these delegation points are in the forward
   DNS tree.

   In both cases, the high-level structure of the domain object class
   consists of information about the domain registration, nameserver
   information related to the domain name, and entities related to the
   domain name (e.g., registrant information, contacts, etc.).

   The following is an elided example of the domain object showing the
   high-level structure:

   {
     "objectClassName" : "domain",
     "handle" : "XXX",
     "ldhName" : "blah.example.com",
     ...
     "nameservers" :
     [
       ...
     ],
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       ...
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 22

   The domain object class can contain the following members:

   o  objectClassName -- the string "domain"

   o  handle -- a string representing a registry unique identifier of
      the domain object instance

   o  ldhName -- a string describing a domain name in LDH form as
      described in Section 3

   o  unicodeName -- a string containing a domain name with U-labels as
      described in Section 3






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 26]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   o  variants -- an array of objects, each containing the following
      values:

      *  relation -- an array of strings, with each string denoting the
         relationship between the variants and the containing domain
         object (see Section 10.2.5 for a list of suggested variant
         relations).

      *  idnTable -- the name of the Internationalized Domain Name (IDN)
         table of codepoints, such as one listed with the IANA (see IDN
         tables [IANA_IDNTABLES]).

      *  variantNames -- an array of objects, with each object
         containing an "ldhName" member and a "unicodeName" member (see
         Section 3).

   o  nameservers -- an array of nameserver objects as defined by
      Section 5.2

   o  secureDNS -- an object with the following members:

      *  zoneSigned -- true if the zone has been signed, false
         otherwise.

      *  delegationSigned -- boolean true if there are DS records in the
         parent, false otherwise.

      *  maxSigLife -- an integer representing the signature lifetime in
         seconds to be used when creating the RRSIG DS record in the
         parent zone [RFC5910].

      *  dsData -- an array of objects, each with the following members:

         +  keyTag -- an integer as specified by the key tag field of a
            DNS DS record as specified by [RFC4034] in presentation
            format

         +  algorithm -- an integer as specified by the algorithm field
            of a DNS DS record as described by RFC 4034 in presentation
            format

         +  digest -- a string as specified by the digest field of a DNS
            DS record as specified by RFC 4034 in presentation format

         +  digestType -- an integer as specified by the digest type
            field of a DNS DS record as specified by RFC 4034 in
            presentation format




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 27]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


         +  events -- see Section 4.5

         +  links -- see Section 4.2

      *  keyData -- an array of objects, each with the following
         members:

         +  flags -- an integer representing the flags field value in
            the DNSKEY record [RFC4034] in presentation format

         +  protocol -- an integer representation of the protocol field
            value of the DNSKEY record [RFC4034] in presentation format

         +  publicKey -- a string representation of the public key in
            the DNSKEY record [RFC4034] in presentation format

         +  algorithm -- an integer as specified by the algorithm field
            of a DNSKEY record as specified by [RFC4034] in presentation
            format

         +  events -- see Section 4.5

         +  links -- see Section 4.2

      See Appendix D for background information on these objects.

   o  entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1

   o  status -- see Section 4.6

   o  publicIds -- see Section 4.8

   o  remarks -- see Section 4.3

   o  links -- see Section 4.2

   o  port43 -- see Section 4.7

   o  events -- see Section 4.5

   o  network -- represents the IP network for which a reverse DNS
      domain is referenced.  See Section 5.4









Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 28]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   The following is an example of a JSON domain object representing a
   reverse DNS delegation point that might be served by an RIR.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "domain",
     "handle" : "XXXX",
     "ldhName" : "0.2.192.in-addr.arpa",
     "nameservers" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
         "ldhName" : "ns1.rir.example"
       },
       {
         "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
         "ldhName" : "ns2.rir.example"
       }
     ],
     "secureDNS":
     {
       "delegationSigned": true,
       "dsData":
       [
         {
           "keyTag": 12345,
           "algorithm": 3,
           "digestType": 1,
           "digest": "49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC"
         }
       ]
     },
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],
     "links" :
     [
       {
         "value": "http://example.net/domain/XXXX",
         "rel" : "self",
         "href" : "http://example.net/domain/XXXXX",
         "type" : "application/rdap+json"



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 29]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


       }
     ],
     "events" :
     [
       {
         "eventAction" : "registration",
         "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       },
       {
         "eventAction" : "last changed",
         "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z",
         "eventActor" : "joe@example.com"
       }
     ],
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "vcardArray":[
           "vcard",
           [
             ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
             ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
             ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"1"
             }, "language-tag", "fr"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"2"
             }, "language-tag", "en"],
             ["org", {
               "type":"work"
             }, "text", "Example"],
             ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
             ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
             ["adr",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text",
               [
                 "",
                 "Suite 1234",
                 "4321 Rue Somewhere",
                 "Quebec",
                 "QC",
                 "G1V 2M2",
                 "Canada"
               ]



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 30]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             ],
             ["tel",
               { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
               "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
             ],
             ["email",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text", "joe.user@example.com"
             ]
           ]
         ],
         "roles" : [ "registrant" ],
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value": "http://example.net/entity/xxxx",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.net/entity/xxxx",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z",
             "eventActor" : "joe@example.com"
           }
         ]
       }
     ],
     "network" :
     {
       "objectClassName" : "ip network",



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 31]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


       "handle" : "XXXX-RIR",
       "startAddress" : "192.0.2.0",
       "endAddress" : "192.0.2.255",
       "ipVersion" : "v6",
       "name": "NET-RTR-1",
       "type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION",
       "country" : "AU",
       "parentHandle" : "YYYY-RIR",
       "status" : [ "active" ]
     }
   }

                                 Figure 23

   The following is an example of a JSON domain object representing a
   forward DNS delegation point that might be served by a DNR.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "domain",
     "handle" : "XXXX",
     "ldhName" : "xn--fo-5ja.example",
     "unicodeName" : "foo.example",
     "variants" :
     [
       {
         "relation" : [ "registered", "conjoined" ],
         "variantNames" :
         [
           {
             "ldhName" : "xn--fo-cka.example",
             "unicodeName" : "foo.example"
           },
           {
             "ldhName" : "xn--fo-fka.example",
             "unicodeName" : "foo.example"
           }
         ]
       },
       {
         "relation" : [ "unregistered", "registration restricted" ],
         "idnTable": ".EXAMPLE Swedish",
         "variantNames" :
         [
           {
             "ldhName": "xn--fo-8ja.example",
             "unicodeName" : "foo.example"
           }
         ]



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 32]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


       }
     ],
     "status" : [ "locked", "transfer prohibited" ],
     "publicIds":[
       {
         "type":"ENS_Auth ID",
         "identifier":"1234567890"
       }
     ],
     "nameservers" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "ldhName" : "ns1.example.com",
         "status" : [ "active" ],
         "ipAddresses" :
         {
           "v6": [ "2001:db8::123", "2001:db8::124" ],
           "v4": [ "192.0.2.1", "192.0.2.2" ]
         },
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/nameserver/XXXX",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.net/nameserver/XXXX",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 33]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       },
       {
         "objectClassName" : "nameserver",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "ldhName" : "ns2.example.com",
         "status" : [ "active" ],
         "ipAddresses" :
         {
           "v6" : [ "2001:db8::125", "2001:db8::126" ],
           "v4" : [ "192.0.2.3", "192.0.2.4" ]
         },
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/nameserver/XXXX",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.net/nameserver/XXXX",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       }
     ],
     "secureDNS":
     {



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 34]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


        "zoneSigned": true,
        "delegationSigned": true,
        "maxSigLife": 604800,
        "keyData":
        [
          {
            "flags": 257,
            "protocol": 3,
            "algorithm": 1,
            "publicKey": "AQPJ////4Q==",
            "events":
            [
              {
                "eventAction": "last changed",
                "eventDate": "2012-07-23T05:15:47Z"
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
     },
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],
     "links" :
     [
       {
         "value": "http://example.net/domain/XXXX",
         "rel" : "self",
         "href" : "http://example.net/domain/XXXX",
         "type" : "application/rdap+json"
       }
     ],
     "port43" : "whois.example.net",
     "events" :
     [
       {
         "eventAction" : "registration",
         "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       },
       {
         "eventAction" : "last changed",



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 35]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


         "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z",
         "eventActor" : "joe@example.com"
       },
       {
         "eventAction" : "transfer",
         "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z",
         "eventActor" : "joe@example.com"
       },
       {
         "eventAction" : "expiration",
         "eventDate" : "2016-12-31T23:59:59Z",
         "eventActor" : "joe@example.com"
       }
     ],
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "vcardArray":[
           "vcard",
           [
             ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
             ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
             ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"1"
             }, "language-tag", "fr"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"2"
             }, "language-tag", "en"],
             ["org", {
               "type":"work"
             }, "text", "Example"],
             ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
             ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
             ["adr",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text",
               [
                 "",
                 "Suite 1234",
                 "4321 Rue Somewhere",
                 "Quebec",
                 "QC",
                 "G1V 2M2",
                 "Canada"
               ]



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 36]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             ],
             ["tel",
               { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
               "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
             ],
             ["email",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text", "joe.user@example.com"
             ]
           ]
         ],
         "status" : [ "validated", "locked" ],
         "roles" : [ "registrant" ],
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/entity/xxxx",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.net/entity/xxxx",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 24



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 37]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


5.4.  The IP Network Object Class

   The IP network object class models IP network registrations found in
   RIRs and is the expected response for the "/ip" query as defined by
   [RFC7482].  There is no equivalent object class for DNRs.  The high-
   level structure of the IP network object class consists of
   information about the network registration and entities related to
   the IP network (e.g., registrant information, contacts, etc.).

   The following is an elided example of the IP network object type
   showing the high-level structure:

   {
     "objectClassName" : "ip network",
     "handle" : "XXX",
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       ...
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 25

   The following is an example of the JSON object for the network
   registration information.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "ip network",
     "handle" : "XXXX-RIR",
     "startAddress" : "2001:db8::",
     "endAddress" : "2001:db8:0:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff",
     "ipVersion" : "v6",
     "name": "NET-RTR-1",
     "type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION",
     "country" : "AU",
     "parentHandle" : "YYYY-RIR",
     "status" : [ "active" ],
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 38]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


     "links" :
     [
       {
         "value" : "http://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48",
         "rel" : "self",
         "href" : "http://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48",
         "type" : "application/rdap+json"
       },
       {
         "value" : "http://example.net/ip/2001:db8::/48",
         "rel" : "up",
         "href" : "http://example.net/ip/2001:C00::/23",
         "type" : "application/rdap+json"
       }
     ],
     "events" :
     [
       {
         "eventAction" : "registration",
         "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       },
       {
         "eventAction" : "last changed",
         "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       }
     ],
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "vcardArray":[
           "vcard",
           [
             ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
             ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
             ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"1"
             }, "language-tag", "fr"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"2"
             }, "language-tag", "en"],
             ["org", {
               "type":"work"
             }, "text", "Example"],
             ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
             ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 39]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             ["adr",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text",
               [
                 "",
                 "Suite 1234",
                 "4321 Rue Somewhere",
                 "Quebec",
                 "QC",
                 "G1V 2M2",
                 "Canada"
               ]
             ],
             ["tel",
               { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
               "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
             ],
             ["email",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text", "joe.user@example.com"
             ]
           ]
         ],
         "roles" : [ "registrant" ],
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/entity/xxxx",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.net/entity/xxxx",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 40]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 26

   The IP network object class can contain the following members:

   o  objectClassName -- the string "ip network"

   o  handle -- a string representing an RIR-unique identifier of the
      network registration

   o  startAddress -- the starting IP address of the network, either
      IPv4 or IPv6

   o  endAddress -- the ending IP address of the network, either IPv4 or
      IPv6

   o  ipVersion -- a string signifying the IP protocol version of the
      network: "v4" signifies an IPv4 network, and "v6" signifies an
      IPv6 network

   o  name -- an identifier assigned to the network registration by the
      registration holder

   o  type -- a string containing an RIR-specific classification of the
      network

   o  country -- a string containing the two-character country code of
      the network

   o  parentHandle -- a string containing an RIR-unique identifier of
      the parent network of this network registration

   o  status -- an array of strings indicating the state of the IP
      network

   o  entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1

   o  remarks -- see Section 4.3




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 41]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   o  links -- see Section 4.2

   o  port43 -- see Section 4.7

   o  events -- see Section 4.5

5.5.  Autonomous System Number Entity Object Class

   The Autonomous System number (autnum) object class models Autonomous
   System number registrations found in RIRs and represents the expected
   response to an "/autnum" query as defined by [RFC7482].  There is no
   equivalent object class for DNRs.  The high-level structure of the
   autnum object class consists of information about the network
   registration and entities related to the autnum registration (e.g.,
   registrant information, contacts, etc.) and is similar to the IP
   network entity object class.

   The following is an example of a JSON object representing an autnum.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "autnum",
     "handle" : "XXXX-RIR",
     "startAutnum" : 10,
     "endAutnum" : 15,
     "name": "AS-RTR-1",
     "type" : "DIRECT ALLOCATION",
     "status" : [ "active" ],
     "country": "AU",
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "description" :
         [
           "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
           "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
         ]
       }
     ],
     "links" :
     [
       {
         "value" : "http://example.net/autnum/xxxx",
         "rel" : "self",
         "href" : "http://example.net/autnum/xxxx",
         "type" : "application/rdap+json"
       }
     ],
     "events" :



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 42]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


     [
       {
         "eventAction" : "registration",
         "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       },
       {
         "eventAction" : "last changed",
         "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
       }
     ],
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "vcardArray":[
           "vcard",
           [
             ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
             ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
             ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"1"
             }, "language-tag", "fr"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"2"
             }, "language-tag", "en"],
             ["org", {
               "type":"work"
             }, "text", "Example"],
             ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
             ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
             ["adr",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text",
               [
                 "",
                 "Suite 1234",
                 "4321 Rue Somewhere",
                 "Quebec",
                 "QC",
                 "G1V 2M2",
                 "Canada"
               ]
             ],
             ["tel",
               { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
               "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 43]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             ],
             ["email",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text", "joe.user@example.com"
             ]
           ]
         ],
         "roles" : [ "registrant" ],
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/entity/XXXX",
             "rel" : "self",
             "href" : "http://example.net/entity/XXXX",
             "type" : "application/rdap+json"
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 27








Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 44]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   The Autonomous System number object class can contain the following
   members:

   o  objectClassName -- the string "autnum"

   o  handle -- a string representing an RIR-unique identifier of the
      autnum registration

   o  startAutnum -- a number representing the starting number [RFC5396]
      in the block of Autonomous System numbers

   o  endAutnum -- a number representing the ending number [RFC5396] in
      the block of Autonomous System numbers

   o  name -- an identifier assigned to the autnum registration by the
      registration holder

   o  type -- a string containing an RIR-specific classification of the
      autnum

   o  status -- an array of strings indicating the state of the autnum

   o  country -- a string containing the name of the two-character
      country code of the autnum

   o  entities -- an array of entity objects as defined by Section 5.1

   o  remarks -- see Section 4.3

   o  links -- see Section 4.2

   o  port43 -- see Section 4.7

   o  events -- see Section 4.5

6.  Error Response Body

   Some non-answer responses may return entity bodies with information
   that could be more descriptive.

   The basic structure of that response is an object class containing an
   error code number (corresponding to the HTTP response code) followed
   by a string named "title" and an array of strings named
   "description".







Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 45]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   This is an example of the common response body.

   {
     "errorCode": 418,
     "title": "Your Beverage Choice is Not Available",
     "description":
     [
       "I know coffee has more ummppphhh.",
       "Sorry, dude!"
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 28






































Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 46]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   This is an example of the common response body with an
   rdapConformance and notices data structures:

   {
     "rdapConformance" :
     [
       "rdap_level_0"
     ],
     "notices" :
     [
       {
         "title" : "Beverage Policy",
         "description" :
         [
           "Beverages with caffeine for keeping horses awake."
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/ip/192.0.2.0/24",
             "rel" : "alternate",
             "type" : "text/html",
             "href" : "http://www.example.com/redaction_policy.html"
           }
         ]
       }
     ],
     "lang" : "en",
     "errorCode": 418,
     "title": "Your beverage choice is not available",
     "description":
     [
       "I know coffee has more ummppphhh.",
       "Sorry, dude!"
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 29













Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 47]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


7.  Responding to Help Queries

   The appropriate response to /help queries as defined by [RFC7482] is
   to use the notices structure as defined in Section 4.3.

   This is an example of a response to a /help query including the
   rdapConformance data structure.

   {
     "rdapConformance" :
     [
       "rdap_level_0"
     ],
     "notices" :
     [
       {
         "title" : "Authentication Policy",
         "description" :
         [
           "Access to sensitive data for users with proper credentials."
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/help",
             "rel" : "alternate",
             "type" : "text/html",
             "href" : "http://www.example.com/auth_policy.html"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 30

8.  Responding To Searches

   [RFC7482] specifies three types of searches: domains, nameservers,
   and entities.  Responses to these searches take the form of an array
   of object instances where each instance is an appropriate object
   class for the search (i.e., a search for /domains yields an array of
   domain object instances).  These arrays are contained within the
   response object.







Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 48]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   The names of the arrays are as follows:

   o  for /domains searches, the array is "domainSearchResults"

   o  for /nameservers searches, the array is "nameserverSearchResults"

   o  for /entities searches, the array is "entitySearchResults"

   The following is an elided example of a response to a /domains
   search.

   {
     "rdapConformance" :
     [
       "rdap_level_0"
     ],
     ...
     "domainSearchResults" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "domain",
         "handle" : "1-XXXX",
         "ldhName" : "1.example.com",
         ...
       },
       {
         "objectClassName" : "domain",
         "handle" : "2-XXXX",
         "ldhName" : "2.example.com",
         ...
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 31

9.  Indicating Truncated Responses

   In cases where the data of a response needs to be limited or parts of
   the data need to be omitted, the response is considered "truncated".
   A truncated response is still valid JSON, but some of the results in
   a search set or some of the data in an object are not provided by the
   server.  A server may indicate this by including a typed notice in
   the response object.

   The following is an elided example of a search response that has been
   truncated.




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 49]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   {
     "rdapConformance" :
     [
       "rdap_level_0"
     ],
     "notices" :
     [
       {
         "title" : "Search Policy",
         "type" : "result set truncated due to authorization",
         "description" :
         [
           "Search results are limited to 25 per day per querying IP."
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/help",
             "rel" : "alternate",
             "type" : "text/html",
             "href" : "http://www.example.com/search_policy.html"
           }
         ]
       }
     ],
     "domainSearchResults" :
     [
       ...
     ]
   }


                                 Figure 32

   A similar technique can be used with a typed remark where a single
   object has been returned and data in that object has been truncated.
   Such an example might be an entity object with only a partial set of
   the IP networks associated with it.













Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 50]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   The following is an elided example of an entity truncated data.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "entity",
     "handle" : "ANENTITY",
     "roles" : [ "registrant" ],
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle": "ANEMBEDDEDENTITY",
         "roles" : [ "technical" ],
         ...
       },
       ...
     ],
     "networks" :
     [
       ...
     ],
     ...
     "remarks" :
     [
       {
         "title" : "Data Policy",
         "type" : "object truncated due to unexplainable reason",
         "description" :
         [
           "Some of the data in this object has been removed."
         ],
         "links" :
         [
           {
             "value" : "http://example.net/help",
             "rel" : "alternate",
             "type" : "text/html",
             "href" : "http://www.example.com/data_policy.html"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }


                                 Figure 33





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 51]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


10.  IANA Considerations

10.1.  RDAP JSON Media Type Registration

   This specification registers the "application/rdap+json" media type.

      Type name: application

      Subtype name: rdap+json

      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
      Section 6 of [RFC7159].

      Interoperability considerations: There are no known
      interoperability problems regarding this media format.

      Published specification: RFC 7483

      Applications that use this media type: Implementations of the
      Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP).

      Additional information: This media type is a product of the IETF
      WEIRDS working group.  The WEIRDS charter, information on the
      WEIRDS mailing list, and other documents produced by the WEIRDS
      working group can be found at
      <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/weirds/>.

      Person & email address to contact for further information: IESG
      <iesg@ietf.org>

      Intended usage: COMMON

      Restrictions on usage: none

      Author: Andy Newton

      Change controller: IETF

      Provisional Registration: No (upon publication of this RFC)







Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 52]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


10.2.  JSON Values Registry

   IANA has created a category in the protocol registries labeled
   "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", and within that category,
   IANA has established a URL-referenceable, stand-alone registry
   labeled "RDAP JSON Values".  This new registry is for use in the
   notices and remarks (Section 4.3), status (Section 4.6), role
   (Section 5.1), event action (Section 4.5), and domain variant
   relation (Section 5.3) fields specified in RDAP.

   Each entry in the registry contains the following fields:

   1.  Value -- the string value being registered.

   2.  Type -- the type of value being registered.  It should be one of
       the following:

       *  "notice or remark type" -- denotes a type of notice or remark.

       *  "status" -- denotes a value for the "status" object member as
          defined by Section 4.6.

       *  "role" -- denotes a value for the "role" array as defined in
          Section 5.1.

       *  "event action" -- denotes a value for an event action as
          defined in Section 4.5.

       *  "domain variant relation" -- denotes a relationship between a
          domain and a domain variant as defined in Section 5.3.

   3.  Description -- a one- or two-sentence description regarding the
       meaning of the value, how it might be used, and/or how it should
       be interpreted by clients.

   4.  Registrant Name -- the name of the person registering the value.

   5.  Registrant Contact Information -- an email address, postal
       address, or some other information to be used to contact the
       registrant.

   This registry is operated under the "Expert Review" policy defined in
   [RFC5226].








Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 53]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   Review of registrations into this registry by the designated
   expert(s) should be narrowly judged on the following criteria:

   1.  Values in need of being placed into multiple types must be
       assigned a separate registration for each type.

   2.  Values must be strings.  They should be multiple words separated
       by single space characters.  Every character should be
       lowercased.  If possible, every word should be given in English
       and each character should be US-ASCII.

   3.  Registrations should not duplicate the meaning of any existing
       registration.  That is, if a request for a registration is
       significantly similar in nature to an existing registration, the
       request should be denied.  For example, the terms "maintainer"
       and "registrant" are significantly similar in nature as they both
       denote a holder of a domain name or Internet number resource.  In
       cases where it may be reasonably argued that machine
       interpretation of two similar values may alter the operation of
       client software, designated experts should not judge the values
       to be of significant similarity.

   4.  Registrations should be relevant to the common usages of RDAP.
       Designated experts may rely upon the serving of the value by a
       DNR or RIR to make this determination.

   The following sections provide initial registrations into this
   registry.

10.2.1.  Notice and Remark Types

   The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
   registry:

      Value: result set truncated due to authorization
      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 proper authorization will yield a longer result set.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org










Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 54]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      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 an excessively heavy load on the server.  This may indicate
         to some clients that requerying at a later time will yield a
         longer result set.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      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.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: object truncated due to authorization
      Type: notice and remark type
      Description: The object does not contain all data due to lack of
         authorization.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: object truncated due to excessive load
      Type: notice and remark type
      Description: The object does not contain all data due to an
         excessively heavy load on the server.  This may indicate to
         some clients that requerying at a later time will yield all
         data of the object.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: object truncated due to unexplainable reasons
      Type: notice and remark type
      Description: The object does not contain all data for an
         unexplainable reason.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org







Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 55]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


10.2.2.  Status

   The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
   registry:

      Value: validated
      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 entity object instances to note the validity of
         identifying contact information.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: renew prohibited
      Type: status
      Description: Renewal or reregistration of the object instance is
         forbidden.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: update prohibited
      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
         another are forbidden.  This type of status normally applies to
         DNR domain names.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      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.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 56]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      Value: proxy
      Type: status
      Description: The registration of the object instance has been
         performed by a third party.  This is most commonly applied to
         entities.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: private
      Type: status
      Description: The information of the object instance is not
         designated for public consumption.  This is most commonly
         applied to entities.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: removed
      Type: status
      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
         been altered for the purposes of not readily revealing the
         actual information of the object instance.  This is most
         commonly applied to entities.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: associated
      Type: status
      Description: The object instance is associated with other object
         instances in the registry.  This is most commonly used to
         signify that a nameserver is associated with a domain or that
         an entity is associated with a network resource or domain.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 57]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      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 and autnum registrations, it signifies that they are
         allocated or assigned for use in operational networks.  This
         maps to the "OK" status of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol
         (EPP) [RFC5730] .
      Registrant Name: IESG
      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
      Description: Changes to the object instance cannot be made,
         including the association of other object instances.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: pending create
      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










Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 58]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      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
      Type: status
      Description: A request has been received for the update or
         modification of the object instance, but this action is not yet
         complete.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: pending delete
      Type: status
      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

   The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
   registry:

      Value: registration
      Type: event action
      Description: The object instance was initially registered.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: reregistration
      Type: event action
      Description: The object instance was registered subsequently to
         initial registration.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org






Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 59]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      Value: last changed
      Type: event action
      Description: An action noting when the information in the object
         instance was last changed.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: expiration
      Type: event action
      Description: The object instance has been removed or will be
         removed at a predetermined 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 predetermined.
      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
         registrant to another.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: locked
      Type: event action
      Description: The object instance was locked (see the "locked"
         status).
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 60]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      Value: unlocked
      Type: event action
      Description: The object instance was unlocked (see the "locked"
         status).
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org

10.2.4.  Roles

   The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
   registry:

      Value: registrant
      Type: role
      Description: The entity object instance is the registrant of the
         registration.  In some registries, this is known as a
         maintainer.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: technical
      Type: role
      Description: The entity object instance is a technical contact for
         the registration.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: administrative
      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
      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








Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 61]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      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.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      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).
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: sponsor
      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
         another entity object, such as a registrant.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: notifications
      Type: role
      Description: An entity object instance designated to receive
         notifications about association object instances.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 62]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      Value: noc
      Type: role
      Description: The entity object instance handles communications
         related to a network operations center (NOC).
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org

10.2.5.  Variant Relations

   The following values have been registered in the "RDAP JSON Values"
   registry:

      Value: registered
      Type: domain variant relation
      Description: The variant names are registered in the registry.
      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
      Type: domain variant relation
      Description: Registration of the variant names is restricted to
         certain parties or within certain rules.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org


      Value: open registration
      Type: domain variant relation
      Description: Registration of the variant names is available to
         generally qualified registrants.
      Registrant Name: IESG
      Registrant Contact Information: iesg@ietf.org











Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 63]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


      Value: conjoined
      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.  Security Considerations

   This specification models information serialized in JSON format.  As
   JSON is a subset of JavaScript, implementations are advised to follow
   the security considerations outlined in Section 6 of [RFC7159] to
   prevent code injection.

   Though not specific to JSON, RDAP implementers should be aware of the
   security considerations specified in [RFC7480] and the security
   requirements and considerations in [RFC7481].

   Clients caching data, especially clients using RDAP-specific caches
   (instead of HTTP-layer caches), should have safeguards to prevent
   cache poisoning.  See Section 5 for advice on using the self links
   for caching.

   Finally, service operators should be aware of the privacy mechanisms
   noted in Section 13.

12.  Internationalization Considerations

12.1.  Character Encoding

   The default text encoding for JSON responses in RDAP is UTF-8
   [RFC3629], and all servers and clients MUST support UTF-8.

12.2.  URIs and IRIs

   [RFC7480] defines the use of URIs and IRIs in RDAP.

12.3.  Language Tags

   Section 4.4 defines the use of language tags in the JSON responses
   defined in this document.









Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 64]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


12.4.  Internationalized Domain 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 registries is described by the "variants" object in Section 5.3
   and the suggested values listed in Section 10.2.5.

13.  Privacy Considerations

   This specification suggests status values to denote contact and
   registrant information that has been marked as private and/or has
   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
   privacy concerns associated with the object instance.  The following
   status codes SHOULD be used to describe data elements of a response
   when appropriate:

      private -- The object is not be shared in query responses, unless
      the user is authorized to view this information.

      removed -- Data elements within the object have been collected but
      have been omitted from the response.  This option can be used to
      prevent unauthorized access to associated object instances without
      the need to mark them as private.

      obscured -- Data elements within the object have been collected,
      but the response value has been altered so that values are not
      easily discernible.  A value changed from "1212" to "XXXX" is an
      example of obscured data.  This option may reveal privacy
      sensitive information and should only be used when data
      sensitivity does not require a more protective option like
      "private" or "removed".

   See Appendix A.1 for an example of applying those values to contacts
   and registrants.

14.  References

14.1.  Normative References

   [ISO.3166.1988]
              International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for
              the representation of names of countries, 3rd edition",
              ISO Standard 3166, August 1988.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 65]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   [RFC3339]  Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the
              Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>.

   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
              10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.

   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC
              3986, January 2005,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.

   [RFC4034]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
              Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions",
              RFC 4034, March 2005,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4034>.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.

   [RFC5396]  Huston, G. and G. Michaelson, "Textual Representation of
              Autonomous System (AS) Numbers", RFC 5396, December 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5396>.

   [RFC5646]  Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Tags for Identifying
              Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, September 2009,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5646>.

   [RFC5890]  Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
              Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
              RFC 5890, August 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.

   [RFC5952]  Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6
              Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5952>.

   [RFC5988]  Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 5988, October 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5988>.

   [RFC7095]  Kewisch, P., "jCard: The JSON Format for vCard", RFC 7095,
              January 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7095>.

   [RFC7159]  Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
              Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>.



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 66]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   [RFC7480]  Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the
              Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7480, March
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>.

   [RFC7481]  Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
              Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481, March
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.

   [RFC7482]  Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "Registration Data Access
              Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", RFC 7482, March 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7482>.

14.2.  Informative References

   [IANA_IDNTABLES]
              IANA, "Repository of IDN Practices",
              <http://www.iana.org/domains/idn-tables>.

   [JSON_ascendancy]
              MacVittie, L., "The Stealthy Ascendancy of JSON", April
              2011, <https://devcentral.f5.com/weblogs/macvittie/
              archive/2011/04/27/the-stealthy-ascendancy-of-json.aspx>.

   [JSON_performance_study]
              Nurseitov, N., Paulson, M., Reynolds, R., and C. Izurieta,
              "Comparison of JSON and XML Data Interchange Formats: A
              Case Study", 2009,
              <http://www.cs.montana.edu/izurieta/pubs/caine2009.pdf>.

   [RFC3912]  Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912,
              September 2004, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3912>.

   [RFC5730]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
              STD 69, RFC 5730, August 2009,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.

   [RFC5910]  Gould, J. and S. Hollenbeck, "Domain Name System (DNS)
              Security Extensions Mapping for the Extensible
              Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", RFC 5910, May 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5910>.

   [RFC6350]  Perreault, S., "vCard Format Specification", RFC 6350,
              August 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6350>.

   [RFC6839]  Hansen, T. and A. Melnikov, "Additional Media Type
              Structured Syntax Suffixes", RFC 6839, January 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6839>.




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 67]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


Appendix A.  Suggested Data Modeling with the Entity Object Class

A.1.  Registrants and Contacts

   This document does not provide specific object classes for
   registrants and contacts.  Instead, the entity object class may be
   used to represent a registrant or contact.  When the entity object is
   embedded inside a containing object such as a domain name or IP
   network, the "roles" string array can be used to signify the
   relationship.  It is recommended that the values from Section 10.2.4
   be used.

   The following is an example of an elided containing object with an
   embedded entity that is both a registrant and administrative contact:

   {
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         "vcardArray":[
           "vcard",
           [
             ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
             ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
             ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"1"
             }, "language-tag", "fr"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"2"
             }, "language-tag", "en"],
             ["org", {
               "type":"work"
             }, "text", "Example"],
             ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
             ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
             ["adr",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text",
               [
                 "",
                 "Suite 1234",
                 "4321 Rue Somewhere",
                 "Quebec",
                 "QC",



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 68]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


                 "G1V 2M2",
                 "Canada"
               ]
             ],
             ["tel",
               { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
               "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
             ],
             ["email",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text", "joe.user@example.com"
             ]
           ]
         ],
         "roles" : [ "registrant", "administrative" ],
         "remarks" :
         [
           {
             "description" :
             [
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "events" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "registration",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           },
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 34

   In many use cases, it is necessary to hide or obscure the information
   of a registrant or contact due to policy or other operational
   matters.  Registries can denote these situations with "status" values
   (see Section 10.2.2).





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 69]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   The following is an elided example of a registrant with information
   changed to reflect that of a third party.

   {
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         ...
         "roles" : [ "registrant", "administrative" ],
         "status" : [ "proxy", "private", "obscured" ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 35

A.2.  Registrars

   This document does not provide a specific object class for
   registrars, but like registrants and contacts (see Appendix A.1), the
   "roles" string array maybe used.  Additionally, many registrars have
   publicly assigned identifiers.  The publicIds structure (Section 4.8)
   represents that information.

   The following is an example of an elided containing object with an
   embedded entity that is a registrar:

   {
     ...
     "entities":[
       {
         "objectClassName" : "entity",
         "handle":"XXXX",
         "vcardArray":[
           "vcard",
           [
             ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
             ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe's Fish, Chips, and Domains"],
             ["kind", {}, "text", "org"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"1"
             }, "language-tag", "fr"],
             ["lang", {
               "pref":"2"
             }, "language-tag", "en"],



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 70]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             ["org", {
               "type":"work"
             }, "text", "Example"],
             ["adr",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text",
               [
                 "",
                 "Suite 1234",
                 "4321 Rue Somewhere",
                 "Quebec",
                 "QC",
                 "G1V 2M2",
                 "Canada"
               ]
             ],
             ["tel",
               {
                 "type":["work", "voice"],
                 "pref":"1"
               },
               "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
             ],
             ["email",
               { "type":"work" },
               "text", "joes_fish_chips_and_domains@example.com"
             ]
           ]
         ],
         "roles":[ "registrar" ],
         "publicIds":[
           {
             "type":"IANA Registrar ID",
             "identifier":"1"
           }
         ],
         "remarks":[
           {
             "description":[
               "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
               "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
             ]
           }
         ],
         "links":[
           {
             "value":"http://example.net/entity/XXXX",
             "rel":"alternate",



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 71]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             "type":"text/html",
             "href":"http://www.example.com"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 36

Appendix B.  Modeling Events

   Events represent actions that have taken place against a registered
   object at a certain date and time.  Events have three properties: the
   action, the actor, and the date and time of the event (which is
   sometimes in the future).  In some cases, the identity of the actor
   is not captured.

   Events can be modeled in three ways:

   1.  events with no designated actor

   2.  events where the actor is only designated by an identifier

   3.  events where the actor can be modeled as an entity

   For the first use case, the events data structure (Section 4.5) is
   used without the "eventActor" object member.

   This is an example of an "events" array without the "eventActor".

   "events" :
   [
     {
       "eventAction" : "registration",
       "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 37

   For the second use case, the events data structure (Section 4.5) is
   used with the "eventActor" object member.








Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 72]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   This is an example of an "events" array with the "eventActor".

   "events" :
   [
     {
       "eventAction" : "registration",
       "eventActor" : "XYZ-NIC",
       "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
     }
   ]

                                 Figure 38

   For the third use case, the "asEventActor" array is used when an
   entity (Section 5.1) is embedded into another object class.  The
   "asEventActor" array follows the same structure as the "events" array
   but does not have "eventActor" attributes.

   The following is an elided example of a domain object with an entity
   as an event actor.

   {
     "objectClassName" : "domain",
     "handle" : "XXXX",
     "ldhName" : "foo.example",
     "status" : [ "locked", "transfer prohibited" ],
     ...
     "entities" :
     [
       {
         "handle" : "XXXX",
         ...
         "asEventActor" :
         [
           {
             "eventAction" : "last changed",
             "eventDate" : "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
           }
         ]
       }
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 39







Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 73]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


Appendix C.  Structured vs. Unstructured Addresses

   The entity (Section 5.1) object class uses jCard [RFC7095] to
   represent contact information, including postal addresses. jCard has
   the ability to represent multiple language preferences, multiple
   email address and phone numbers, and multiple postal addresses in
   both a structured and unstructured format.  This section describes
   the use of jCard for representing structured and unstructured
   addresses.

   The following is an example of a jCard.

   {
     "vcardArray":[
       "vcard",
       [
         ["version", {}, "text", "4.0"],
         ["fn", {}, "text", "Joe User"],
         ["n", {}, "text",
           ["User", "Joe", "", "", ["ing. jr", "M.Sc."]]
         ],
         ["kind", {}, "text", "individual"],
         ["lang", {
           "pref":"1"
         }, "language-tag", "fr"],
         ["lang", {
           "pref":"2"
         }, "language-tag", "en"],
         ["org", {
           "type":"work"
         }, "text", "Example"],
         ["title", {}, "text", "Research Scientist"],
         ["role", {}, "text", "Project Lead"],
         ["adr",
           { "type":"work" },
           "text",
           [
             "",
             "Suite 1234",
             "4321 Rue Somewhere",
             "Quebec",
             "QC",
             "G1V 2M2",
             "Canada"
           ]
         ],
         ["adr",
           {



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 74]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


             "type":"home",
             "label":"123 Maple Ave\nSuite 90001\nVancouver\nBC\n1239\n"
           },
           "text",
           [
             "", "", "", "", "", "", ""
           ]
         ],
         ["tel",
           { "type":["work", "voice"], "pref":"1" },
           "uri", "tel:+1-555-555-1234;ext=102"
         ],
         ["tel",
           {
             "type":["work", "cell", "voice", "video", "text"]
           },
           "uri",
           "tel:+1-555-555-1234"
         ],
         ["email",
           { "type":"work" },
           "text", "joe.user@example.com"
         ],
         ["geo", {
           "type":"work"
         }, "uri", "geo:46.772673,-71.282945"],
         ["key",
           { "type":"work" },
           "uri", "http://www.example.com/joe.user/joe.asc"
         ],
         ["tz", {},
           "utc-offset", "-05:00"],
         ["url", { "type":"home" },
           "uri", "http://example.org"]
       ]
     ]
   }

                                 Figure 40

   The arrays in Figure 40 with the first member of "adr" represent
   postal addresses.  In the first example, the postal address is given
   as an array of strings and constitutes a structured address.  For
   components of the structured address that are not applicable, an
   empty string is given.  Each member of that array aligns with the
   positions of a vCard as given in [RFC6350].  In this example, the
   following data corresponds to the following positional meanings:




Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 75]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   1.  post office box -- not applicable; empty string

   2.  extended address (e.g., apartment or suite number) -- Suite 1234

   3.  street address -- 4321 Rue Somewhere

   4.  locality (e.g., city) -- Quebec

   5.  region (e.g., state or province) -- QC

   6.  postal code -- G1V 2M2

   7.  country name (full name) -- Canada

   The second example is an unstructured address.  It uses the label
   attribute, which is a string containing a newline (\n) character to
   separate address components in an unordered, unspecified manner.
   Note that in this example, the structured address array is still
   given but that each string is an empty string.

Appendix D.  Secure DNS

   Section 5.3 defines the "secureDNS" member to represent secure DNS
   information about domain names.

   DNSSEC provides data integrity for DNS through the digital signing of
   resource records.  To enable DNSSEC, the zone is signed by one or
   more private keys and the signatures are stored as RRSIG records.  To
   complete the chain of trust in the DNS zone hierarchy, a digest of
   each DNSKEY record (which contains the public key) must be loaded
   into the parent zone, stored as DS records, and signed by the
   parent's private key (RRSIG DS record), as indicated in "Resource
   Records for the DNS Security Extensions" [RFC4034].  Creating the DS
   records in the parent zone can be done by the registration authority
   "Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions Mapping for the
   Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)" [RFC5910].

   Only DS-related information is provided by RDAP, since other
   information is not generally stored in the registration database.
   Other DNSSEC-related information can be retrieved with other DNS
   tools such as dig.

   The domain object class (Section 5.3) can represent this information
   using either the "dsData" or "keyData" object arrays.  Client
   implementers should be aware that some registries do not collect or
   do not publish all of the secure DNS meta-information.





Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 76]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


Appendix E.  Motivations for Using JSON

   This section addresses a common question regarding the use of JSON
   over other data formats, most notably XML.

   It is often pointed out that many DNRs and one RIR support the EPP
   [RFC5730] standard, which is an XML serialized protocol.  The logic
   is that since EPP is a common protocol in the industry, it follows
   that XML would be a more natural choice.  While EPP does influence
   this specification quite a bit, EPP serves a different purpose, which
   is the provisioning of Internet resources between registries and
   accredited registrars and serving a much narrower audience than that
   envisioned for RDAP.

   By contrast, RDAP has a broader audience and is designed for public
   consumption of data.  Experience from RIRs with first generation
   RESTful web services for WHOIS indicate that a large percentage of
   clients operate within browsers and other platforms where full-blown
   XML stacks are not readily available and where JSON is a better fit.

   Additionally, while EPP is used in much of the DNR community it is
   not a universal constant in that industry.  And finally, EPP's use of
   XML predates the specification of JSON.  If EPP had been defined
   today, it may very well have used JSON instead of XML.

   Beyond the specific DNR and RIR communities, the trend in the broader
   Internet industry is also switching to JSON over XML, especially in
   the area of RESTful web services (see [JSON_ascendancy]).  Studies
   have also found that JSON is generally less bulky and consequently
   faster to parse (see [JSON_performance_study]).

Acknowledgements

   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, and Maarten Bosteels contributed significant review comments
   and provided clarifying text.  James Mitchell provided text regarding
   the processing of unknown JSON attributes and identified issues



Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 77]


RFC 7483                   RDAP JSON Responses                March 2015


   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 has been created.

Authors' Addresses

   Andrew Lee Newton
   American Registry for Internet Numbers
   3635 Concorde Parkway
   Chantilly, VA  20151
   United States

   EMail: andy@arin.net
   URI:   http://www.arin.net


   Scott Hollenbeck
   Verisign Labs
   12061 Bluemont Way
   Reston, VA  20190
   United States

   EMail: shollenbeck@verisign.com
   URI:   http://www.verisignlabs.com/
















Newton & Hollenbeck          Standards Track                   [Page 78]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.119, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/