Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-02.txt: currency error handling, command wildcard

Thomas Corte <Thomas.Corte@knipp.de> Wed, 29 March 2017 08:42 UTC

Return-Path: <Thomas.Corte@knipp.de>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33580128B38 for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 01:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 4Y8QK9lCB7Bc for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 01:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kmx10a.knipp.de (clust3a.bbone.knipp.de [195.253.6.83]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7352E127333 for <regext@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 01:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.bbone.knipp.de [127.0.0.1]) by kmx10a.knipp.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A7697D5; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:42:46 +0200 (MESZ)
X-Knipp-VirusScanned: Yes
Received: from kmx10a.knipp.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (kmx10a.knipp.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10004) with ESMTP id gLR3fZff3qFI; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:42:06 +0200 (MESZ)
Received: from hp9000.do.knipp.de (hp9000.do.knipp.de [195.253.2.54]) by kmx10a.knipp.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD65297D4; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:42:06 +0200 (MESZ)
Received: from flexo.fritz.box (fw-intranet-eth3-0.do.knipp.de [195.253.2.17]) by hp9000.do.knipp.de (@(#)Sendmail version 8.15.2 - Revision 1.0 :: HP-UX 11.31 - 29th July,2016/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v2T8g6Hf013320; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:42:06 +0200 (MESZ)
To: regext@ietf.org
References: <4E86D777-B3D0-4015-8FE1-56B4E5E39E1F@verisign.com>
Cc: support@tango-rs.com
From: Thomas Corte <Thomas.Corte@knipp.de>
Message-ID: <b18198b3-3e9d-3bad-7411-eef1462e0b1c@knipp.de>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:42:01 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4E86D777-B3D0-4015-8FE1-56B4E5E39E1F@verisign.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/-b9FKyVvJLIHZq5Im_uHo3B0cQE>
Subject: Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-02.txt: currency error handling, command wildcard
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:42:49 -0000

Hello James,

On 28/03/2017 20:10, Gould, James wrote:

> Jody, 
> 
> Yes, the fee information should be returned for a reserved domain if pricing information does exist.  

Not sure what this would mean. If a domain is reserved, that usually
means that it's not available for registration under *any* circumstances.
Therefore there should never be a pricing information available for such
a domain.

The alternative would be to return the *fictitious* price for the domain
should it ever *become* available in the future, but that's impossible to
assess and would not provide useful information to the registrar.


In our current implementation, the fee information returned by a
<fee:check> is generally identical to the fee information that would be
returned if the registrar actually tried to execute the given transform
command on the given domain name, in the given launch phase, with the
given period. That includes a check for the name's actual availability.
It's essentially a simulation of the given operation on the name.

While I agree that the availability check is already a task that the
standard <check> command accomplishes, the fee extension provides the
opportunity to extend its basic functionality. If e.g. a registry
releases premium names by allowing their registration in specific launch
phases, each with specific prices, the fee extension provides (at least
in version fee-0.15) a way to tell the registrar in which of these phases
a name is available, and at which price.

Best regards,

Thomas

-- 
TANGO REGISTRY SERVICES® is a product of:
Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
Technologiepark                             Phone: +49 231 9703-222
Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9                       Fax: +49 231 9703-200
D-44227 Dortmund                       E-Mail: support@tango-rs.com
Germany