[regext] Re: ccTLDs using EPP

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

I agree that changing the EPP XML URIs or customizing the XML schema files, where backward compatibility is not maintained, is not EPP.  I had to modify the EPP XML schemas a couple times (e.g., support I-D RGP "(pre/post)Whois" elements and the RGP RFC "(pre/post)Data" elements during a transition period) in my 20+ years of implementing EPP, but they were transitory in nature and maintained backward compatibility.  Note, the RGP change could have been mitigated by using point versioning of the XML URIs that was used with later EPP extensions like the Registry Fee Extension ("urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:fee-0.XX" up to -09 and "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:fee-1.0" after WGLC and in the RFC).  Changing of the EPP XML URIs or making non-backward compatible changes to the XML schema files should not be classified as EPP, since the same client software cannot be used with the server independent of the server policy differences.       

-- 

JG 



James Gould
Fellow Engineer
[e-mail] <applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/[e-mail]>

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

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




On 8/22/24, 5:09 AM, "Thomas Corte (TANGO support)" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:


Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 


Hello,


On 22.08.24 08:37, Tobias Sattler wrote:


> I investigated which ccTLD might run EPP a while ago based on publicly available information.
> 
> I don’t know if those ccTLDs are following this list, and I cannot guarantee its 100% correctness, 
> but maybe it helps you.
> 
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1WpRMm1SCXp9y4vELKdzIcx_y5fza9EmONwtUyVCAg9IhD-z6AxDGtgCL7lQ25R5pZHUSOaKqHDptf_uxPsATYTuIFjNszNAddMEIPZwzi5EhQgA2VqsWCdvKFYK2nYUD3uBlghuYo0vQKutGNylKLBvgkOzKMdAFI4Kf0F28gNir0aM7YwloOk1fKj1DhmW8NEoq-2vXS6BLDqr9TBAgj7yYPPGmlKQverV5bkcWbQWesfw_ZlQQ1gFQwmYjJVDrmibVLklQYOW5dvghsdQg0GSMDb-Pbv6L3dgpoH4_ufE/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fspreadsheets%2Fd%2F1IMk5TBzeoJTOwDJfQ-I50Kztwr3bipdjcLKy1etG3cg%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1WpRMm1SCXp9y4vELKdzIcx_y5fza9EmONwtUyVCAg9IhD-z6AxDGtgCL7lQ25R5pZHUSOaKqHDptf_uxPsATYTuIFjNszNAddMEIPZwzi5EhQgA2VqsWCdvKFYK2nYUD3uBlghuYo0vQKutGNylKLBvgkOzKMdAFI4Kf0F28gNir0aM7YwloOk1fKj1DhmW8NEoq-2vXS6BLDqr9TBAgj7yYPPGmlKQverV5bkcWbQWesfw_ZlQQ1gFQwmYjJVDrmibVLklQYOW5dvghsdQg0GSMDb-Pbv6L3dgpoH4_ufE/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fspreadsheets%2Fd%2F1IMk5TBzeoJTOwDJfQ-I50Kztwr3bipdjcLKy1etG3cg%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing> 


Given that e.g. .pl and .cz are on this list, it should be pointed out that the list is based on a 
very lax interpretation of "using EPP". Among other things, these two registries (these are just 
examples I'm aware of, I'm sure there are other offenders) are using heavily modified versions of 
the EPP XML schema files, with a custom target namespace, so that's not really EPP at all; 
registrars thinking they can just use their off-the-shelf EPP client to connect to them are in for a 
rude awakening.


So "using EPP" here really means something like "XML-based provisioning protocol, roughly resembling 
EPP".


Best regards,


Thomas


-- 
TANGO REGISTRY SERVICES®
Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH Thomas Corte
Technologiepark Phone: [phone]
Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 Fax: [phone]
D-44227 Dortmund E-Mail: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Germany


_______________________________________________
regext mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>