Re: [eppext] EPP Extension Registration Requests from DK-Hostmaster

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: EppExt [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Hollenbeck,
> Scott
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 7:02 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [eppext] EPP Extension Registration Requests from DK-
> Hostmaster
> 
> Yesterday I received 10 requests from IANA to review EPP extensions
> submitted by DK-Hostmaster. I'll forward each of them to this list
> momentarily. I've reviewed all of them and I'm going to suggest that
> they be considered as one request since each describes an element that
> is part of the same schema and the same specification.

More detail:

The specification for each of the registration requests can be found here:

https://github.com/DK-Hostmaster/epp-service-specification

The current version of the schema can be found here:

https://github.com/DK-Hostmaster/epp-xsd-files/blob/master/dkhm-1.4.xsd

Each of the registration requests refers to an element that is defined in this schema:

<element name="userType" type="dkhm:userType" /> 
<element name="EAN" type="dkhm:EAN" /> 
<element name="CVR" type="dkhm:CVR" /> 
<element name="pnumber" type="dkhm:pnumber" /> 
<element name="contact" type="dkhm:contact" /> 
<element name="trackingNo" type="dkhm:trackingNo" /> 
<element name="domainAdvisory" type="dkhm:domainAdvisory" /> 
<element name="orderconfirmationToken" type="dkhm:orderconfirmationToken" /> 
<element name="domain_confirmed" type="dkhm:domain_confirmed" /> 
<element name="contact_validated" type="dkhm:contact_validated" /> 
<element name="registrant_validated" type="dkhm:registrant_validated" />

Each of these elements ultimately refers to an XML schema simpleType that includes a restriction for a base of type token. Based on my reading of the specification I believe the last three elements could be more efficiently represented as booleans, but what's there certainly works.

As I said in my first message in this thread I'd like to recommend to IANA that they process these requests as a single addition to the registry since each request describes an XML element that is part of the same schema and namespace. Could the other DEs please share your thoughts?

Scott