Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery

Thomas Corte <Thomas.Corte@knipp.de> Mon, 07 August 2017 16:46 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 B67001324C5 for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:46:40 -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] 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 ihZS9l7xHSl6 for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kmx10a.knipp.de (clust3b.bbone.knipp.de [195.253.6.85]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF80513202B for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.bbone.knipp.de [127.0.0.1]) by kmx10a.knipp.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6B59809; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 18:46:37 +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 p-xmETbmM6kJ; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 18:46:00 +0200 (MESZ)
Received: from hp9000.do.knipp.de (hp9000.do.knipp.de [195.253.2.54]) by kmx10a.knipp.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2674C9804; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 18:45:55 +0200 (MESZ)
Received: from flexo.fritz.box (fw-intranet-eth3-0.do.knipp.de [195.253.2.17]) by hp9000.do.knipp.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BCC70E66; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 18:45:55 +0200 (MESZ)
To: Jody Kolker <jkolker@godaddy.com>, "Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Cc: "support@tango-rs.com" <support@tango-rs.com>
References: <8CC3F09A-084F-41A1-9BE7-F44A293BA665@verisign.com> <d4945015-3413-68a4-18ea-ebbb5f28e315@knipp.de> <ED032B40-2895-4124-9755-26879D7FE5A6@verisign.com> <98dcc1e4-3bc4-0499-2f13-fdd73cb42aed@knipp.de> <673DD6EE-36B6-496B-BA7F-499DD09371D3@verisign.com> <44f0fdc8-d665-6179-41b7-855fd41f460d@knipp.de> <SN1PR0201MB1792004419E7E4B6047D4F5DBFB50@SN1PR0201MB1792.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
From: Thomas Corte <Thomas.Corte@knipp.de>
Organization: Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
Message-ID: <301b4b49-c836-b107-7e84-d384f5536f6d@knipp.de>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 18:45:55 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <SN1PR0201MB1792004419E7E4B6047D4F5DBFB50@SN1PR0201MB1792.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/EDoQQKlsQHoQMnCQhTnUJVcAoYg>
Subject: Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery
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: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 16:46:41 -0000

Hello Jody,

On 07/08/2017 18:27, Jody Kolker wrote:

> In this paragraph, it sounds like the domain:create command does not need a fee to be sent into create the premium domain.  It only needs the correct phase?  Is that correct?

Yes, requiring registrars to specify the correct phase was exactly our
approach to preventing the accidental registration of expensive names.

It seemed like a natural solution at the time - the fee extension didn't
seem mature (and widespread) enough to be used, and launch phases allowed
us to essentially introduce domain/tariff categories without the need for
yet another proprietary extension, which we're trying to avoid as much as
possible.

Later, when the fee extension seemed suitable, we added it as an
*alternative* to the launch phase extension. I.e., a registrar can now
*either* provide the correct phase *or* supply the expected fees (or
both). Yet with the latest changes to the fee extension, our server can
no longer truthfully report correct fees since the registrar would have
to know the right phase up front, creating a chicken-egg problem.

> In your implementation, is the premium phase specified in the "phase" attribute or in the "subphase" attribute?

Both approaches are possible, entirely "custom" phases or sub-phases of a
standard phase.

Best regards,

Thomas

-- 
____________________________________________________________________
     |       |
     | knipp |            Knipp  Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
      -------                    Technologiepark
                                 Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9
                                 44227 Dortmund
                                 Deutschland

     Dipl.-Informatiker          Tel:    +49 231 9703-0
     Thomas Corte                Fax:    +49 231 9703-200
     Stellvertretender Leiter    SIP:    Thomas.Corte@knipp.de
     Software-Entwicklung        E-Mail: Thomas.Corte@knipp.de

                                 Registereintrag:
                                 Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728

                                 Geschäftsführer:
                                 Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp