Re: [provreg] New Version Notification for draft-brown-epp-fees-01.txt

Gavin Brown <gavin.brown@centralnic.com> Thu, 08 May 2014 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <gavin.brown@centralnic.com>
X-Original-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8308D1A00C6 for <provreg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2014 10:55:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.037
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 N-PfWS9OpyD0 for <provreg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2014 10:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.centralnic.com (mail-7.fnb.uk.centralnic.net [5.44.25.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF63A1A00B4 for <provreg@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2014 10:55:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.43.58] (unknown [31.68.128.99]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.centralnic.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2F95F9EBA; Thu, 8 May 2014 17:55:37 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <536BC518.4050400@centralnic.com>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 18:55:36 +0100
From: Gavin Brown <gavin.brown@centralnic.com>
Organization: CentralNic Ltd
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pat Moroney <pmoroney@name.com>, Jens Wagner <jwagner@hexonet.net>
References: <CF7FD1F2.5DB6E%jgould@verisign.com> <53628077.8070402@centralnic.com> <CADJsPYwLj3uPCU=VenL2rVYkf7ZeD7=TXHjevL2WRgC44Vwx_g@mail.gmail.com> <A939B4D2-FF12-428D-A943-0A0A1DE94B9F@isc.org> <CAAHh_-+05Opw9vhiAAE=FPrQCaAFQ0aNGcxpNn-5Xn-fGgj5pg@mail.gmail.com> <CADJsPYzmxGm5NKnj35KLbHybih-3SQKJ3psi035okpqmvu2Epw@mail.gmail.com> <F0AA8F24-323D-4F32-A271-6FC2A0FDE746@nic.br> <536BA06C.4070004@hexonet.net> <CADJsPYyYiR3FZH-HNcw=4sgw9E0uCfR_orD4TAVPfDvPQSVySQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADJsPYyYiR3FZH-HNcw=4sgw9E0uCfR_orD4TAVPfDvPQSVySQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
OpenPGP: id=F923B4CE
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pMWe5Lwg8w824cwn9B8qAlWTKTdhrdgXe"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/provreg/5fncO501h5m_u_xvmW41Sgfl_xI
Cc: "provreg@ietf.org" <provreg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [provreg] New Version Notification for draft-brown-epp-fees-01.txt
X-BeenThere: provreg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPP discussion list <provreg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/provreg>, <mailto:provreg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/provreg/>
List-Post: <mailto:provreg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:provreg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg>, <mailto:provreg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 17:55:44 -0000

On 08/05/2014 17:07, Pat Moroney wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> I like the optional type attribute being added to the <fee:cd> as well
> as required on the <fee:create> if it was set.
> Especially if that optional description attribute is added to the
> <fee:fee> element as well, which was hinted at in Gavin's email about
> the new draft.
> 
> He had the following example:
> S:         <fee:cd
> S:           xmlns:fee="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:fee-0.5">
> 
> S:           <fee:fee description="Application Fee">5.00</fee:fee>
> S:           <fee:fee description="Registration Fee">5.00</fee:fee>
> S:         </fee:cd>
> 
> That, combined with the type attribute, allows a lot of flexability for
> registries.
> For example, Donuts, if they used this extension, could then return the
> following for a premium domain during their Early Access Period day 2:
> 
> S:         <fee:cd
> S:           xmlns:fee="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:fee-0.5" type="BBB+">
> S:           <fee:name>example.com</fee:name>
> S:           <fee:currency>USD</fee:currency>
> S:           <fee:command>create</fee:command>
> S:           <fee:period unit="y">1</fee:period>
> S:           <fee:fee description="Early Access Fee">2500.00</fee:fee>
> S:           <fee:fee description="Registration Fee">66.00</fee:fee>
> S:         </fee:cd>
> 
> That allows a registrar to recognize that the domain is a premium as
> well as there being added fees, and differentiating what those fees are for.

The current working draft includes a "description" attribute on the
<fee:fee> elements. If we're going to add additional syntax to describe
the domain itself, then I think that syntax should be added to the
<fee:name> element, like so:

S:  <fee:cd>
S:    <fee:name class="premium">example.com</fee:name>
S:    <fee:currency>USD</fee:currency>
S:    <fee:command>create</fee:command>
S:    <fee:period unit="y">1</fee:period>
S:    <fee:fee description="Early Access Fee">2500.00</fee:fee>
S:    <fee:fee description="Registration Fee">66.00</fee:fee>
S:  </fee:cd>

The above example uses "class" as the attribute name, but it could just
as easily be "category" or "type" or something similar. The value of the
attribute would be a token, which would presumably come from a set of
possible tokens that the server would provide to clients out-of-band.

Thoughts?

-- 
Gavin Brown
Chief Technology Officer
CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC)
Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services
for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries
https://www.centralnic.com/

CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London,
EC2R 6AR.