Re: Changes we'd make to EPP, was Re: Domain check in draft-obispo-epp-idn-00.txt

James,

I believe I've been a bit to vague on my proposal. I would of course 
embed these answers in the <epp:resData/> part of the poll response. 
5730 specifies that this can be done with <obj:trnData/>, so 
<obj:creData/> and <obj:infData/> should be possible too. This way at 
least for create/update/renew/transfer should be covered by rfc 5730. 
The problem is to determine if the message is in response to a former 
request from the registrar or registry initiated. But that might not 
even be so important. In any case the registry is letting the registrar 
know that an object has been changed.

And yes, the usage of <obj:delete/> is "creative". Unfortunately is is 
no <obj:delData/> defined.  But I certainly can get

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
      <response>
        <result code="1301">
          <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
        </result>
        <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
          <qDate>2000-06-08T22:00:00.0Z</qDate>
          <msg>Transfer requested.</msg>
        </msgQ>
        <resData>
           <contact:delete 
xmlns:contact="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0">
             <contact:id>12345</contact:id>
           </contact:delete>
        </resData>
        <trID>
          <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
          <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
        </trID>
      </response>
    </epp>

to validate. So maybe we take that as "allowed by rfc 5730".

/Ulrich


> Ulrich,
>
> Can you provide a reference to the extension created by .SE for registry
> changes for review?  Using a command (obj:delete) in response to a command
> (poll) would not meet RFC 5730.  Use of obj:creData I don't believe would
> match the context.  Use of obj:infData could work since it's the most
> generic to cover any changes, but it wouldn't provide any specific
> information on a garbage collection delete except for maybe text in the
> <msgQ><msg>  element (e.g. "deleted - orphaned" or something like that).
> This is not clean but it wouldn¹t require any new extensions or mappings.
>
>
>
> On 1/17/12 3:12 AM, "Ulrich Wisser"<[email protected]>  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> here at .Se we have done some extension to notify registrars of database
>> changes done by the registry. Today I believe that we do not even need
>> an extension for that.
>>
>> To notify the registrar of changes we could use
>>    obj:creData
>>    obj:infData
>>    obj:delete
>> for the respective change. I realize that obj:delete is actually used as
>> command but there is nothing in the xsd file that prevents reusing it as
>> response. The absence of clTRID would indicate that the command was
>> initiated by the registry.
>>
>> /Ulrich
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> provreg mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
>

_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg