IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Gould, James" <JGould@verisign.com> Fri, 25 April 2014 12:52 UTC

Return-Path: <JGould@verisign.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 282691A04AE for <provreg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:52:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 57GZfCkWxH9R for <provreg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod6og116.obsmtp.com (exprod6og116.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8541A04A3 for <provreg@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:52:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from osprey.verisign.com ([216.168.239.75]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob116.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKU1padIGSzFRs8Op6f0t2+TuYLdksBktp@postini.com; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:52:06 PDT
Received: from brn1wnexcas01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (brn1wnexcas01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.173.152.205]) by osprey.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id s3PCq3eh018635 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:52:04 -0400
Received: from BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) by brn1wnexcas01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:52:02 -0400
From: "Gould, James" <JGould@verisign.com>
To: Klaus Malorny <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>, "provreg@ietf.org" <provreg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [provreg] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-brown-epp-fees-01.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPYBe1A9J3vXGcy02yqe7PGF1aUpsiQxCAgAAHEoA=
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:52:01 +0000
Message-ID: <CF7FD1F2.5DB6E%jgould@verisign.com>
In-Reply-To: <535A1C47.1050206@knipp.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.6.130613
x-originating-ip: [10.173.152.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <A837FAF4DD44F949AC556BEC39D0D823@verisign.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/provreg/aQzhhoZxiv3ArV6SjLU-YLJkgaE
Subject: Re: [provreg] Fwd: 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: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:52:15 -0000

+1, the elements of the extension should be contained under a single
extension element in the commands and responses.
-- 
 
JG
 

 
James Gould
Principal Software Engineer
jgould@verisign.com
 
703-948-3271 (Office)
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
VerisignInc.com




On 4/25/14, 4:26 AM, "Klaus Malorny" <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de> wrote:

>On 25.04.2014 01:48, Seth Goldman wrote:
>> Hi Gavin,
> >
> > [...]
> >
>> As far as I can tell, no other EPP extensions puts repeated types
>>inside the
>> <extension> element (for either commands or responses). Instead, they
>>use a
>> top-level container type, with repeated elements nested underneath
>>that, e.g.:
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>
>>    <epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
>>    <command>
>>      <check>
>>        <domain:check xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
>>        ...
>>        </domain:check>
>>      </check>
>>      <extension>
>>        <fee:check xmlns:fee="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:fee-0.4">
>>          <fee:domain>
>>            <fee:name>example.tld</fee:name>
>>            ...
>>          </fee:domain>
>>          <fee:domain>
>>            <fee:name>example.com <http://example.com></fee:name>
>>            ...
>>          </fee:domain>
>>          <fee:domain>
>>            <fee:name>example.org <http://example.org></fee:name>
>>            ...
>>          </fee:domain>
>>        </fee:check>
>>      </extension>
>>      <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
>>    </command>
>> </epp>
>>
>> I think if you modified your draft to follow this pattern, it would be
>>more in
>> line with the convention used by other EPP extensions.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Seth
>>
>>
>
>Hi all,
>
>I fully support Seth's suggestion, it would be better not to repeat the
>extension itself, but list the response for each domain within a single
>extension.
>
>Regards,
>
>Klaus
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>provreg mailing list
>provreg@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email