Re: ICANN TMCH draft specifications available - EPP extensions?

+1

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 24, 2012, at 6:42 AM, Gregory Berezowsky <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Hollenbeck, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> > Behalf Of Alexander Mayrhofer
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 6:12 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [provreg] ICANN TMCH draft specifications available - EPP
> > extensions?
> >
> > The current version of ICANN's trademark clearinghouse specifications
> > was published on April 13th. Looking through that document, i noticed
> > that it requires a certain set of EPP extensions in order to transmit
> > trademark claims/registration related data over EPP.
> >
> > Since the implementation of the TMCH is required for all operators of a
> > new gTLD, i was wondering whether there is already work going on
> > regarding specification of those EPP extensions? It would certainly not
> > make much sense if every backend operator of a new gTLD invents their
> > own schema/extension in order to support those required new data fields
> > (registrars will certainly not appreciate those multiple extensions as
> > well..).
> >
> > Therefore, if no work has yet been performed on the specification of
> > those extensions in an internet draft, i think it makes sense to bundle
> > forces among new gTLD backend operators in order to create such an
> > extension. (Apart from that, i would also appreciate informal tech
> > contacts to other emerging new gTLD backend operators, in order to
> > discuss other operational / technical issues around the EPP
> > implementation).
> 
> Jim Gould and I are interested in working on a standard extension or extensions for Verisign, but I'm worried about the timing of the need for these specs and ICANN's launch schedule. Coming to agreement on a standard approach in a short amount of time is going to be a challenge.
> 
> I am also interested in participating on standardizing this. At Afilias, we have similar concerns on the timing.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> provreg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg

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