Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol
Maarten Bosteels <maarten.bosteels@dns.be> Wed, 06 November 2013 12:55 UTC
Return-Path: <maarten.bosteels@dns.be>
X-Original-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 659F911E8197 for <provreg@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 6 Nov 2013 04:55:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bzp9K4miXvxd for
<provreg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 04:55:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta01.nug.nucleus.be (mta01.nug.nucleus.be [77.73.97.132]) by
ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2C2D11E8195 for <provreg@ietf.org>;
Wed, 6 Nov 2013 04:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost6.localdomain6 [127.0.0.1]) by
mta01.nug.nucleus.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E2CB1212CD;
Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:55:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mta01.nug.nucleus.be ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost
(mta01.nug.nucleus.be [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id
QeZK1lX_PGD4; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:55:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost6.localdomain6 [127.0.0.1]) by
mta01.nug.nucleus.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E97E121C67;
Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:55:08 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mta01.nug.nucleus.be
Received: from mta01.nug.nucleus.be ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost
(mta01.nug.nucleus.be [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id
8JzszVKvIN4i; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:55:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from nug.nucleus.be (old.nug.nucleus.be [77.73.97.156]) by
mta01.nug.nucleus.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 067E91212CD;
Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:55:08 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:55:07 +0100 (CET)
From: Maarten Bosteels <maarten.bosteels@dns.be>
To: Gavin Brown <gavin.brown@centralnic.com>
Message-ID: <1889282799.7884880.1383742507913.JavaMail.zimbra@staff.dns.be>
In-Reply-To: <527A381D.4010008@centralnic.com>
References: <CE99706E.51081%jgould@verisign.com>
<52779E1E.7070209@centralnic.com>
<B90E03E1-76A2-4806-91F2-608C206B64E6@mwyoung.ca>
<20636CAF-8C45-467D-B72D-0D15D076E0AD@isc.org> <5277DF59.9030404@irial.com>
<52780367.8070603@centralnic.com>
<CAAHh_-+a7TAGE01b_kXtAT9oF+-VtBu5goGcRyiW02FSfYxTNg@mail.gmail.com>
<527A381D.4010008@centralnic.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_7884879_998531951.1383742507909"
X-Originating-IP: [77.67.63.234]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.4_GA_5737 (ZimbraWebClient - GC30 (Mac)/8.0.4_GA_5737)
Thread-Topic: Registry Fee Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol
Thread-Index: rFK59SwR2u0Q+j/iZQoXkHQL5ETpYw==
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 12:39:56 -0800
Cc: EPP Provreg <provreg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Extensible Provisioning
Protocol
X-BeenThere: provreg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 12:55:16 -0000
See also the EPP extension by ARI: http://ausregistry.github.io/doc/price-1.0/price-1.0.html which is also mentioned here: http://ariservices.com/registrars/ari-registry_implementation.pdf Maarten ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Gavin Brown" <gavin.brown@centralnic.com> | To: "Seth Goldman" <sethamin@google.com> | Cc: "EPP Provreg" <provreg@ietf.org> | Sent: Wednesday, 6 November, 2013 1:37:49 PM | Subject: Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Extensible Provisioning | Protocol | On 04/11/2013 22:29, Seth Goldman wrote: | > I agree with James' suggestion that the extension should be orthogonal | > to the billable command, and it should return the fee associated with | > that command. | The latest version does this - see Section 2.2 of the draft published on | the IETF website. | > Even better would be to have two possible modes of the extension: the | > first would be a "dry-run" mode that would return the fee associated | > with the command, and the second would let the registrar to pass the fee | > with the command and have the registry fail if the fee doesn't match the | > actual billable amount. That way there can be no confusion as to what | > amount the registrar is getting charged. | I was contacted off-list by another registry who have implemented an | extension very similar to mine. Their extension provides a mechanism | whereby the client includes the expected fee (previously obtained by | performing a lookup) in the command. The server can then reject the | command if the fee submitted does not match what it calculates it to be. | This ensures that both client and server agree what the fee for the | transaction is, before it takes place. | I very much like this idea and am planning on incorporating it into the | next version of my draft. | G. | -- | 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. | _______________________________________________ | provreg mailing list | provreg@ietf.org | https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
- [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Extensib… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Michele Neylon - Blacknight
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Rubens Kuhl
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Michele Neylon - Blacknight
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gould, James
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Klaus Malorny
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Luis Muñoz
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… MICHAEL W YOUNG
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Luis Muñoz
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gould, James
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… MICHAEL W YOUNG
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Luis Muñoz
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Jan Saell
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Patrick Mevzek
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Seth Goldman
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… MICHAEL W YOUNG
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Patrick Mevzek
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gavin Brown
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Maarten Bosteels
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Keith Gaughan
- Re: [provreg] Registry Fee Extension for the Exte… Gould, James