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

"Linlin Zhou" <> Thu, 24 December 2015 09:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35AEC1ACED9 for <>; Thu, 24 Dec 2015 01:31:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.571
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.571 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, GB_ABOUTYOU=0.5, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.981, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k5-F0d6CNEnU for <>; Thu, 24 Dec 2015 01:31:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FA071ACE82 for <>; Thu, 24 Dec 2015 01:31:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zll (unknown []) by (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0DZ4DhOu3tWx14lCQ--.26459S2; Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:30:54 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:31:19 +0800
From: Linlin Zhou <>
To: JGould <>
References: <>, <>, <>, <>, <>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7, 2, 5, 136[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_001_NextPart561086265503_=----"
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0DZ4DhOu3tWx14lCQ--.26459S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW3Jr4UXr17XF4UKFW5Wr1xKrg_yoW3uw1DpF W0qr15Ka4kJ3WfC34Iqw12gry5uF95K39rGFn8Aw18Aas8tFyjgF40k3W5Aa4xurnxtw1j vr429w15Ww10v3DanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUQ0b7Iv0xC_Cr1lb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I2 0VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rw A2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Ar0_tr1l84ACjcxK6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr0_Gr1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I 8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0DM2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x20xvEncxIr21le4C267I2x7xF 54xIwI1l5I8CrVAaz4v26cxKscIFY7kG0wAqx4xG6xAIxVCFxsxG0wAqx4xG6I80eVA0xI 0YY7vIx2IE14AGzxvEb7x7McIj6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1j6r18McIj6I8E87Iv67AKxVWU JVW8JwAm72CE4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lF7xvr2IYc2Ij64vIr41lFcxC0VAYjxAxZF0Ew4 CEw7xC0wACY4xI67k04243AVC20s07MxkIecxEwVAFwVW8uwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCF x2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r106r1rMI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14 v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jrv_JF1lIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY 67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2 IYs7xG6rW3Jr0E3s1lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY1x0267AK xVWUJVW8JbIYCTnIWIevJa73UjIFyTuYvjxUxxhLDUUUU
X-CM-SenderInfo: p2kr3zplqox0w6fq0xffof0/
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, lidaiming <>
Subject: Re: [eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 09:31:09 -0000

Hi James,
Thanks for your feedback.

Linlin Zhou
From: Gould, James
Date: 2015-12-23 23:52
To: Linlin Zhou
CC:; lidaiming
Subject: Re: [eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt

Thanks of the quick reply, my feedback is included below.



James Gould
Distinguished Engineer

12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190 

On Dec 22, 2015, at 2:07 AM, Linlin Zhou <> wrote:

Hi James,
Thanks for your review. I have following feedbacks about your questions.
1. The drafts specified the query commands only, which are now implemented in some registries in China, to fufill most of the critical requirements . We are not going to add transform extension in EPP drafts at present as this function of upload proof materials has been developed and implemented via HTTP. Maybe after a sufficient test of using EPP transform commands to transfer large files, we could consider standardizing this part in EPP extension. 

Since they are informational drafts it makes sense to include what is currently implemented, but it does not provide a complete solution for verification.  My recommendation is to publish your HTTP API as informational drafts to cover the transform side of the solution or extend the transform commands in your EPP extensions.  As noted previously on the list, there is no technical reason that EPP cannot be used to submit the verification material.

[Linlin] Thanks for your suggestion. We've considered this issue and found that BCP of HTTP API may be more proper. 

2. Actually in verification process, there are typically two phases, domain verification and contact verification. Domain verification is aimed to check whether a domain is reserved or prohibited. Contact verification is to check the facticity of a person. So These two drafts are seperated.

There is added complexity in separating them since the aggregate verification (domain and real name) impacts the domain and not the contact.  In EPP contacts are managed separately from the domains, so putting the verification on the contacts raises some additional questions:

Do all contacts need to be verified (registrant, admin, tech, and billing), since contacts themselves don’t have the concept of type? 
        [Linlin] Actually only the registrant need to be verified according to the regulation in China.

What is the expected behavior when a domain references a blocked or unverified registrant?   
Does it impact the status of the domain and if so how?  
[Linlin] I think the simple process is to verify the domain, the verification status of a domain is pendingVerify. If it is a banned domain, after the period of pendingVerify, the domain will be deleted, no need to further check contact. If a domain passes verification but the registrant is unverified, the status of the domain maybe changed to serverHold and the status of the contact is failed. Updated proof materials are waited to be resubmitted.
How does the client get notified of the domain status change?  We’re leveraging draft-gould-change-poll for this purpose.
                    [Linlin] Yes, I think the poll command should be extented too.

What happens when the domain is updated to reference a different set of contacts that have different statuses?  
        [Linlin] If only the registrant should be verified, I think a domain will not have different statuses contatcts.
What happens to the domain when the contact statuses change?  
        [Linlin] Please see the above answer.

Some of this behavior can be left to server policy and not explicitly defined in the protocol, but it would be good to know how you see this could work.  

3. Yes, it is specific to China currently. But we don't exclude the possibility to make them as more general drafts if some other countries also have the verification regulations. Daiming Li mentioned to add some content about verification background as well. I think this is a good suggestion and a quick update will be posted soon.

In the verification code draft we defined the concept of a verification profile, which enables the server to communicate the applicable profile and for the client to explicitly specify the desired verification profile to apply.  You may want to consider some sort of similar concept.  The question is whether a client can have more than one applicable profile (province or state within a country), which may not be the case in China but could be elsewhere.  
[Linlin]  From my rough understanding, a extensible protocol should support multiple applicable profiles.


Linlin Zhou
发件人: Gould, James
发送时间: 2015-12-22 05:16
收件人: lidaiming; Linlin Zhou;
主题: Re: [eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt

I have a few high level questions:
In reviewing draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification and draft-wang-eppext-domain-verification, I see only extensions of the query responses (check and info), but I don't see extensions to the transform commands to submit the verification material.  Do you plan on adding extensions to the transform commands in the existing drafts or creating separate drafts for that purpose?  
What is the relationship between the draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification and draft-wang-eppext-domain-verification drafts?  
Is draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification and draft-wang-eppext-domain-verification only applicable to China verification or is being proposed as more general drafts?  I assume based on the Informational track that it's specific to China, but there is no reference to China in either draft.  


From: EppExt [] on behalf of lidaiming []
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 9:41 AM
To: Linlin Zhou;
Subject: Re: [eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt

Thanks for your efforts. 
Since this draft together with draft-wang-eppext-domain-verification-00 is intended to describe the very EPP extensions relating to verification mechanism in China, you might include their background and usecases in these drafts, to shed light on their applications and implementations.
KNET Technologies

发件人:"Linlin Zhou" <>
发送时间:2015-12-21 09:49
主题:[eppext] Fw: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt
The draft of contact verification has been submitted, which is now applied in practice in some registries of China. Any comments are welcome.


Linlin Zhou
From: internet-drafts
Date: 2015-12-21 09:36
Subject: I-D Action: draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
        Title           : Verification Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Contact Mapping
        Authors         : Linlin Zhou
                          Di Ma
                          Wei Wang
                          Ning Kong
                          Xiaodong Lee
                          James Galvin
Filename        : draft-zhou-eppext-contact-verification-00.txt
Pages           : 17
Date            : 2015-12-20
   This mapping describes an verification extension to EPP contact
   mapping [RFC5733].  Specified in Extensible Markup Language (XML),
   this extended mapping is applied to provide additional features
   required for the provisioning of contact verification.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
There's also a htmlized version available at:
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
I-D-Announce mailing list
Internet-Draft directories:
EppExt mailing list