Re: [eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-reseller-00.txt

["Linlin Zhou" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Patrick,

> -----原始邮件----- 
> 发件人: "Patrick Mevzek" <[e-mail]> 
> 发送时间: 2015-05-18 22:15:51 (星期一) 
> 收件人: [e-mail] 
> 抄送: 
> 主题: Re: [eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-reseller-00.txt 
> 
> Linlin Zhou <[e-mail]> 2015-05-18 05:59 
> > > - there should be some explanations on what happens for a domain 
> > > name 
> > > with a reseller that get transfered to another registrar (where 
> > > obvisouly the given previous reseller would not exist). Will the 
> > > reseller info be automatically removed after the transfer 
> > > finishes? 
> > > 
> > If a domain is transfered to a new registrar, the registrar or 
> > reseller will do a domian update operation to update the 
> > corresponding reseller information. 
> 
> Not necessarily possible, if the new registrar does not use at all the 
> resellerext EPP extension… and I doubt that a registry could mandate 
> all registrars to use it. 
> And even if he uses the extension, what mandates him to update the 
> domain? Technically, nothing. If the reseller info is displayed 
> somewhere (whois, escrow, etc…), then a wrong information would be 
> shown. 
> 
> This is the same problem as a transfer with secDNS information. 
> 
> So it will probably be a registry policy, but we may have some 
> scenarios where the reseller info will be kept through the transfer, 
> and other scenarios where it will be wiped out (and if the new 
> registrar wants to specify its own reseller he will do a domain:update 
> afterwards). 
> But maybe the draft should have a sentence about that. 
> 
I understand your consideration. I agree that some text should be added to clarify this problem. What do you think about James' suggested text? 
"This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <transfer> command or <transfer> response described in the [RFC5730], but after a successful transfer of an object with an assigned reseller, the server SHOULD clear the assigned reseller value."

> 2 other points while I'm at it and implementing your other draft: 
> - I will post comments later on your other drafts 
Comments are welcome.

> - I believe there should be somewhere an explanation on how your two 
> drafts articulate between themselves. My understanding is that 
> registrars will create reseller objets with the reseller mapping I-D, 
> and then create domains with the resellerID for the reseller object 
> they created previsouly. If that is not what is intended, some 
> clarifications should be added somewhere. 
> 
Yes, you are right. This is what I am thinking about. There should be some text to describe the relationship between the two drafts. I intend to add a sentence in the intrduction section, such as "A reseller mapping object defined in [ID.draft-zhou-eppext-reseller-mapping] SHOULD be created first. The reseller information specified in this document SHOULD reference the existing reseller identifier and reseller name." 
Then indicate the specified elements defined in draft-zhou-eppext-reseller-mapping in section 3.1 and 3.2. For example:

3.1. Reseller Identifier 

Reseller identifier provides the ID of the reseller of a sponsoring 
registrar. Its corresponding element is <resellerext:resID> defined 
in this document. It refers to the <reseller:id> element defined in [ID.draft-zhou-eppext-reseller-mapping].

3.2. Reseller Name 

Reseller name provides the name of the reseller of a sponsoring 
registrar. Its corresponding element is <resellerext:resName> 
defined in this document. It refers to the <reseller:name> element defined in [ID.draft-zhou-eppext-reseller-mapping].

Regards,
Linlin