Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Support for a "Claims Service" post the Claims Phase
Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl> Tue, 13 January 2015 12:14 UTC
Return-Path: <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>
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 7916D1A8AA1
for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 04:14:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.184
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_64=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_65=0.6,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 k2lLFrjKX8-I for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 04:14:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from arn2-kamx.sidn.nl (kamx.sidn.nl
[IPv6:2a00:d78:0:147:94:198:152:69])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0F811A1B75
for <eppext@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 04:14:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=sidn.nl; s=sidn_nl;
c=relaxed/relaxed;
h=from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator:x-originating-ip:content-type:mime-version;
bh=XaY6c2+KR7cx7FpHd68P4KZHnRUtaaK6WaOm1OguSWM=;
b=F/SRh5kla4vkGvATcMzGy63WpN/r8W5sSRtFdzWBvgyQcWhj25hOzMB6LGvkbo6z9KTKjBG/asHm2uUJxRsSbXvnLV1GCZDIl1q7kKwxZtmtk4dLJzdDn+swh09FwbLS0Y+fRoDUymfR/T806AExNoWbYf2ORWUH6XqdawGMyAo=
Received: from kahubcasn02.SIDN.local ([192.168.2.74])
by arn2-kamx.sidn.nl with ESMTP id t0DCEOFm015233-t0DCEOFo015233
(version=TLSv1.0 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=CAFAIL);
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:14:24 +0100
Received: from KAMBX2.SIDN.local ([fe80::b1fd:88d9:e136:9655]) by kahubcasn02
([192.168.2.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001;
Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:14:22 +0100
From: Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>
To: "'Gould, James'" <JGould@verisign.com>, "eppext@ietf.org" <eppext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Support for a "Claims Service"
post the Claims Phase
Thread-Index: AQHQKT3krDH7sE6wI0yQ8a5hZx2LtJy+AlJA
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 12:14:22 +0000
Message-ID: <C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768B9280D2C@kambx2.SIDN.local>
References: <6B3201F3-4F0B-4689-BF14-5E545EB1DE9D@verisign.com>
In-Reply-To: <6B3201F3-4F0B-4689-BF14-5E545EB1DE9D@verisign.com>
Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.154]
Content-Type: multipart/related;
boundary="_004_C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768B9280D2Ckambx2SIDNlocal_";
type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eppext/gJ2w3RkWyEfccAK4AUCFVeYuFe8>
Subject: Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Support for a "Claims
Service" post the Claims Phase
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 13 Jan 2015 12:14:30 -0000
James, I'm not an expert on the sunrise and claims requirements, but the wording seems correct according the RPM requirements. Gr, Rik From: EppExt [mailto:eppext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gould, James Sent: dinsdag 6 januari 2015 0:18 To: eppext@ietf.org Subject: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Support for a "Claims Service" post the Claims Phase All, There was an issue raised privately in supporting claims as a Claims Service post the Claims Phase. According to section 2.4.3 of the RPM Requirements, "...releases for Allocation or registration such reserved domain name at any time following the start date of the Claims Period, such domain MUST be subject to the Claims Services (as described in Section 3) for a period of ninety (90) calendar days following the date Registry Operator releases such domain name for registration...". This means that support for the Claims Check Form needs to be revised to indicate whether or not the Claims Create Form is needed for the domain name and the use of the Claims Create Form should be supported in phases other than "claims". There are no XML schema changes required to support this. Please review and provide feedback to the proposed revised language in the draft below to include in the next version of the draft that will also include the Implementation Status section discussed at the IETF-91 EPPEXT meeting. Change 3.1.1 "Claims Check Form" as follows: The Claims Check Form defines a new command called the Claims Check Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks, in the specified launch phase, for each domain name passed in the command, that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the Claims Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching trademark exists for the domain name, that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. <launch:name> Contains the fully qualified name of the queried domain name. This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the domain name that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. A value of "1" (or "true") means that a matching trademark does exist and that the "Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. A value of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not exist or that the "Claims Create Form" is NOT required on a Domain Create Command. Change 3.3.2 "Claims Create Form" as follows: <launch:phase> SHOULD contain the value of "claims" to indicate the claims launch phase. A value other than "claims" MAY be used to pass the claims notice for domain names outside of the claims phase. Based on the above revised language the following may be done: 1. During claims phase with a claims check command * If domain has matching trademark * return exists=true * else * return exists=false 1. During post claims phase with a claims check command * If domain was released post claims phase start and is within 90 days of release and has matching trademark * return exists=true * else * return exists=false 1. During claims phase with a create command * If domain has matching trademark * claims notice is required * else * claims notice is NOT required 1. During post claims phase with a create command * If domain was released post claims phase start and is within 90 days of release and has matching trademark return * claims notice is required * else * claims notice is NOT required Thanks, - JG [cid:image001.png@01D02F32.D8EBB2A0] James Gould Distinguished Engineer jgould@Verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://VerisignInc.com> "This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately."
- [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Support fo… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Jody Kolker
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Tran, Trung
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Francisco Obispo
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Francisco Obispo
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Francisco Obispo
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Jody Kolker
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Tran, Trung
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Michael Holloway
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Rik Ribbers
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Michael Holloway
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Jothan Frakes
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Jothan Frakes
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Michael Holloway
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Michael Holloway
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Gould, James
- Re: [eppext] draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase Suppor… Michael Holloway