Re: [eppext] launchphase + domain check

Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at> Tue, 14 July 2015 06:57 UTC

Return-Path: <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at>
X-Original-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE331A8BB6 for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 23:57:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.04
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.04 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9Z63Ef7TJ8xq for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 23:57:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sbg.nic.at (mail.sbg.nic.at [83.136.33.227]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D9041A8AAD for <eppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 23:57:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nics-exch2.sbg.nic.at ([10.17.175.6]) by mail.sbg.nic.at over TLS secured channel (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) with XWall v3.50 ; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:56:54 +0200
Received: from NICS-EXCH2.sbg.nic.at ([fe80::a5b2:6e42:e54d:9d57]) by NICS-EXCH2.sbg.nic.at ([fe80::a5b2:6e42:e54d:9d57%12]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:56:50 +0200
From: Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at>
To: Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>, "eppext@ietf.org" <eppext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [eppext] launchphase + domain check
Thread-Index: AdC9f4yDmUkuuNROTTS4w2NzOYoMcQAglH6Q
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 06:56:49 +0000
Message-ID: <19F54F2956911544A32543B8A9BDE07546868665@NICS-EXCH2.sbg.nic.at>
References: <C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768BA1E963F@kambx2.SIDN.local>
In-Reply-To: <C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768BA1E963F@kambx2.SIDN.local>
Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.10.0.163]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_19F54F2956911544A32543B8A9BDE07546868665NICSEXCH2sbgnic_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-XWALL-BCKS: auto
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eppext/9q-DqcvtcHTkmbyk9AfJ9Sqi3no>
Subject: Re: [eppext] launchphase + domain check
X-BeenThere: eppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <eppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eppext/>
List-Post: <mailto:eppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 06:57:04 -0000

Hello Rik,

We understand that the element MUST only be included by the client when one of the "special" check forms is used. Therefore, we do allow "vanilla" EPP domain checks for the whole runtime of the registry, including all "launch phases".

This also seems what registrars are expecting even during the Claims period, because they usually perform a "normal" check before they attempt a create, and only when that fails, they re-query with the Claims check form..

Alex



Von: EppExt [mailto:eppext-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Rik Ribbers
Gesendet: Montag, 13. Juli 2015 17:26
An: eppext@ietf.org
Betreff: [eppext] launchphase + domain check

All,

I've had a very interesting discussion regarding the launchphase draft. The discussion focusses around the domain check and the TMCH claims period. Section 2.3 of the I-D states that:

** quote on **
The server MAY support multiple launch phases sequentially or simultaneously.  The <launch:phase> element MUST be included by the client to define the target launch phase of the command.
** quote off **

So when doing a domain check during a TMCH claims period the domain check in the "Claims check form", "Availability Check Form" and "Trademark Check Form" must contain the <launch:phase> element describing the active phase.

So far so good. But what about the "normal operation" domain check. This is the standard epp domain check (without the launchphase extension). The draft does not explicitly say anything about it, but according to Section 2.3 one could argue that this is not allowed during a TMCH claims period as there is no <launch:phase> element provided.

I would love to here from other WG-members what they think about this...

Kind regards,
Rik Ribbers