From nobody Wed Jun 4 07:23:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552971A0276 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:23:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.029 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.029 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 O4-vgXA9tV_Z for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:23:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x234.google.com (mail-vc0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEA061A019C for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hq11so6743492vcb.11 for ; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:23:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=24OFYBcm19yRbLSZoOSrvSGWv+zl3f94MW4u0wXtk70=; b=PqfhhFQqqkRIte11gfQ3Ql0eM1crmdXy8ndnGuJmJGVlnD7XUyKufnk3yHDDKELLhO rz5WspfGWfSDU8lFOgVFvjkycwlnC1XbhEAnCuB6MUuiWj/Krq6ihKs8ZZVXg47IDwIx PfTHPlopk9MbktvTommo1n4vEoJmZtB5yRaiQjK56SLX+3w5TeAMng5SWY0I97GGNt5s AaIgnWXFZlvHlIFQ67idJrVNWgxre0pT57Q6kGc74BduFr1n89ksjOxQY0cB/hWEDrrs 9llh4aVblDxt5ib1iaL1nEFVs+aJyZ1FVQn2/V1CsUt9HFCMCzAYBpVLw1adTXJwYKoW jleA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=24OFYBcm19yRbLSZoOSrvSGWv+zl3f94MW4u0wXtk70=; b=eJrITj8agd9w4fESqOX2K6Orz1dEH/PhcZb1c9/RyitHuofbHL14oJOBMY0Q+qTj9X DJerCnKS2DWC8dfGcPIfWYY/KTyneONJ6I2ureq+T/Z5Md2HSbl7HFNPc+IXdyCrlYU3 Zx5OV8S6xYVuOMkhSToip/o9A0tjedoRF6zncbdJN1YWYVeR4anl2r2oxMY8+tYzJWsH VHkm5SPn5QdJC57e3bBbyzvrF85904cPNMygR8Ix3ZR3szNvOO6bwn7l7oIhOdG4Btr5 l1BTRIbfNT0YyyKJhaYAsKSb8DYGlSoAcybHPyFHO8fcDR4Eh4NHS6q648FCaSjJQj6+ YQrw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl5unZ27HwbnHzQ/z7KGwf9aPPyR4DKOwaB6n2j2nclha/puxWxCjChKptnWM10hHAKhzx3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.123.201 with SMTP id q9mr2275278vcr.77.1401891809154; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:23:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.147.133 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:23:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <536BB9A1.1070504@centralnic.com> References: <53628077.8070402@centralnic.com> <536BB92A.6000706@centralnic.com> <536BB9A1.1070504@centralnic.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:23:28 -0400 Message-ID: From: Seth Goldman To: Gavin Brown Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0118258a4c771904fb035fad Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/provreg/P-zd-7nw3cPBISr3fjXo6-16AlM Cc: "provreg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [provreg] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-brown-epp-fees-01.txt X-BeenThere: provreg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: EPP discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:23:38 -0000 --089e0118258a4c771904fb035fad Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Gavin, One slight correction to the version on the github repository - it appears that the schema has a typo. The "fee" element on general transform commands should be a repeated field: https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1492 That is, this element should have 'maxOccurs="unbounded"' on it. The text in the section above make it pretty clear this is the intention, e.g.: https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1108 https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1223 Also, all other occurences of a "feeType" element have this set on it. Second, I would also like to suggest that the server MAY require that the fee extension is always specified on transform commands. That is, it should be a matter of server policy whether the fee extension is required to be passed or not. The current wording suggests that the server will only validate the fee if the extension is passed, but otherwise will behave as it does today. This seems like it should be a matter of server policy. Cheers, Seth On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Gavin Brown wrote: > Sorry, that URL is: > > https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension > > On 08/05/2014 18:04, Gavin Brown wrote: > > The working draft at the URL below has been updated to use this syntax. > > There have also been a number of additional changes - please check the > > change history and the git changelog for further details. > > -- > Gavin Brown > Chief Technology Officer > CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC) > Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services > for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries > https://www.centralnic.com/ > > CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with > company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London, > EC2R 6AR. > > > _______________________________________________ > provreg mailing list > provreg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg > > --089e0118258a4c771904fb035fad Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Gavin,

One slight correction to the = version on the github repository - it appears that the schema has a typo. T= he "fee" element on general transform commands should be a repeat= ed field:
That is,= this element should have 'maxOccurs=3D"unbounded"' on it= .

The text in the section above make it pretty clear this= is the intention, e.g.:
Also, = all other occurences of a "feeType" element have this set on it.<= br>

Second, I would also like to suggest that the ser= ver MAY require that the fee extension is always specified on transform com= mands. That is, it should be a matter of server policy whether the fee exte= nsion is required to be passed or not. The current wording suggests that th= e server will only validate the fee if the extension is passed, but otherwi= se will behave as it does today. This seems like it should be a matter of s= erver policy.

Cheers,
Seth



On Thu, May 8, 2014= at 1:06 PM, Gavin Brown <gavin.brown@centralnic.com> wrote:
Sorry, that URL is:

https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension

On 08/05/2014 18:04, Gavin Brown wrote:
> The working draft at the URL below has been updated to use this syntax= .
> There have also been a number of additional changes - please check the=
> change history and the git changelog for further details.

--
Gavin Brown
Chief Technology Officer
CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC)
Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services
for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries
https://www.centr= alnic.com/

CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London,
EC2R 6AR.


_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
provreg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg


--089e0118258a4c771904fb035fad-- From nobody Tue Jun 10 13:13:10 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF5E1A02D3 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:12:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.029 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.029 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 bQtn42-VEahM for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-x22f.google.com (mail-ve0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADD761A0282 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f175.google.com with SMTP id us18so6723767veb.34 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:12:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=sYlDxG1frG+Czx4mVfL4ait/hvh9nctIUpfMdnSUbgQ=; b=NvSGNxUn0wtUMEXkYswdXp6CnEERz9bE5dGTmNFi1AZkIGbBZjqgpBBj6ZW1gl+gHB qRIsFEIiTpZzMj7Em8JjcdjwBkL3NL5ipY0c9emt4EkuUtp/qds/QjD/1lmfELqAwKT5 +XDKLCUpBwVxxbSL3ld8Hl9PvF+cmZi3yq9rgCVn2Ls4Zgi/0sgzY101iJXtgOQIQc3s i0TV8i3lCgBuTIIEKe+HUdJEnw63nHm3Xb19ipZTqBV1ByL3UH/nbEv3VyD3xymm69ys isjP/ef8dtCYf7cSRDKZiMUNCwi+TDPhOYh1F4aaBBXehTCVUqZaQQuPDLUf/td1pV7V Xqcg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=sYlDxG1frG+Czx4mVfL4ait/hvh9nctIUpfMdnSUbgQ=; b=KPJ4IBiQ6CvnEtHI8SpdDXLApOk3ultMhuKmHjZA5Wq3mqJDV8eKAdzT0MBcCQAEE6 0AIfFTyfjobtiYGYqsdJSXLclGwiRLhLj/p/742McUZLsL6GyJLwq3e9mowD7jxFNaUg kGQXraIcqBfxWNmPVg+9Xon6ddYoS+vqGABLSs+jUNGUtytEBZTZEbfwiVL/614xFyqb pgMAqeqDoLadLc3wLtVkk1Xc+LrXFJeOlltFRh4hswmidFcabLwlglwjDoGjf9IlN92U Vag6Irp+L1pypax8tf1/UMGQXvlqq9sgG0eTp6kZShWHTDFTx6PM3l+zl9aIS32tBJyn ahWA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmXTFDatGdiZYuvtn4QE4XsaMqJqBNc9+oR8xwzrWVUsbYhxhtvvf0GKwtW1amSXkBKned0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.99.36 with SMTP id en4mr2833499veb.62.1402431165579; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:12:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.125.143 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:12:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53628077.8070402@centralnic.com> <536BB92A.6000706@centralnic.com> <536BB9A1.1070504@centralnic.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:12:45 -0400 Message-ID: From: Seth Goldman To: Gavin Brown Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b339f2f7261d204fb80f366 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/provreg/dZLyWkRPV1inZFYseSIoWhx_Je8 Cc: "provreg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [provreg] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-brown-epp-fees-01.txt X-BeenThere: provreg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: EPP discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 20:12:48 -0000 --047d7b339f2f7261d204fb80f366 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Another typo: Line 1270 and 1273 should say "fee:update" instead of "fee:create": https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1270 https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1273 On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Seth Goldman wrote: > Hi Gavin, > > One slight correction to the version on the github repository - it appears > that the schema has a typo. The "fee" element on general transform commands > should be a repeated field: > > https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1492 > That is, this element should have 'maxOccurs="unbounded"' on it. > > The text in the section above make it pretty clear this is the intention, > e.g.: > > https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1108 > > https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension/blob/master/draft-brown-epp-fees.txt#L1223 > Also, all other occurences of a "feeType" element have this set on it. > > Second, I would also like to suggest that the server MAY require that the > fee extension is always specified on transform commands. That is, it should > be a matter of server policy whether the fee extension is required to be > passed or not. The current wording suggests that the server will only > validate the fee if the extension is passed, but otherwise will behave as > it does today. This seems like it should be a matter of server policy. > > Cheers, > Seth > > > > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Gavin Brown > wrote: > >> Sorry, that URL is: >> >> https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension >> >> On 08/05/2014 18:04, Gavin Brown wrote: >> > The working draft at the URL below has been updated to use this syntax. >> > There have also been a number of additional changes - please check the >> > change history and the git changelog for further details. >> >> -- >> Gavin Brown >> Chief Technology Officer >> CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC) >> Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services >> for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries >> https://www.centralnic.com/ >> >> CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with >> company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London, >> EC2R 6AR. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> provreg mailing list >> provreg@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg >> >> > --047d7b339f2f7261d204fb80f366 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Jun 4= , 2014 at 10:23 AM, Seth Goldman <sethamin@google.com> wro= te:
Hi Gavin,

One slight correction to the version on the github repository - it appear= s that the schema has a typo. The "fee" element on general transf= orm commands should be a repeated field:
That is, this element should have 'maxOccurs=3D"unbound= ed"' on it.

The text in the section above make it pretty clear this= is the intention, e.g.:
Also, all other occurences of a "feeType" element have this = set on it.

Second, I would also like to suggest that the ser= ver MAY require that the fee extension is always specified on transform com= mands. That is, it should be a matter of server policy whether the fee exte= nsion is required to be passed or not. The current wording suggests that th= e server will only validate the fee if the extension is passed, but otherwi= se will behave as it does today. This seems like it should be a matter of s= erver policy.

Cheers,
Seth



Sorry, th= at URL is:

https://github.com/centralnic/epp-fee-extension

On 08/05/2014 18:04, Gavin Brown wrote:
> The working draft at the URL below has been updated to use this syntax= .
> There have also been a number of additional changes - please check the=
> change history and the git changelog for further details.

--
Gavin Brown
Chief Technology Officer
CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC)
Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services
for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries
https://www.centr= alnic.com/

CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London,
EC2R 6AR.


_______________________________= ________________
provreg mailing list
provreg@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg



--047d7b339f2f7261d204fb80f366-- From nobody Mon Jun 30 12:18:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: provreg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59DD91A03D9; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:18:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 VYDD3SdZCnHy; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod6og107.obsmtp.com (exprod6og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.208]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B1DA1A03C6; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from peregrine.verisign.com ([216.168.239.74]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob107.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKU7G38MuSt0x5rDfMZNEGXMUG2+bi1oiG@postini.com; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:18:09 PDT Received: from brn1wnexcas02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (brn1wnexcas02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.173.152.206]) by peregrine.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id s5UJI8A6010900 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:18:08 -0400 Received: from BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) by brn1wnexcas02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:18:07 -0400 From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" To: "eppext@ietf.org" , "provreg@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Registry Operations Industry Alliance Redux on RegOps Thread-Index: Ac+UmAS6R0nvj84LR/aMUok33q84Pg== Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 19:18:06 +0000 Message-ID: <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F49440B78@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.173.152.4] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/provreg/uJ1RwtDI2BGSlyIgenTlu9Nf6z8 Subject: [provreg] Registry Operations Industry Alliance Redux on RegOps X-BeenThere: provreg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" List-Id: EPP discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 19:18:11 -0000 Sorry for cross-posting - please DO NOT reply to the eppext or provreg list= s! I just started this discussion on the regops mailing list. There might be p= eople on provreg or eppext who aren't aware of regops so I thought I'd brin= g it to your attention: http://nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/private/regops/2014-June/000139.html You'll need to subscribe to regops to view the archive and join the discuss= ion: http://nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/listinfo/regops Scott