Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery

["Gould, James" <[e-mail]>]

Thomas, 

Use of the phase and sub-phase as a mechanism for clients to indicate fee or domain grouping categories was not the intent in draft-ietf-regext-launchphase.  At the IETF-98 REGEXT WG meeting it was unclear when there would be overlapping launch phases.  The launch phase and sub-phase is meant to cover the launch of the TLD itself, where your overlapping phases does not apply to the TLD but to groups of domains within the TLD.  I believe use of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees is the appropriate path forward for the grouping of premium domains and not use of phases and sub-phases in draft-ietf-regext-launchphase.  If you fully transition to leverage draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees for premium domain grouping, do you have any need for overlapping launch phases in draft-ietf-regext-launchphase, and if so please describe why?

Thanks,   
  
—
 
JG



James Gould
Distinguished Engineer
[e-mail]

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> 

On 8/7/17, 12:45 PM, "Thomas Corte" <[e-mail]> wrote:

    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:    [phone]
         Thomas Corte                Fax:    [phone]
         Stellvertretender Leiter    SIP:    [e-mail]
         Software-Entwicklung        E-Mail: [e-mail]
    
                                     Registereintrag:
                                     Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
    
                                     Geschäftsführer:
                                     Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp