| Registration Protocols Extensions | R. Carney |
| Internet-Draft | J. Snitker |
| Intended status: Standards Track | GoDaddy Inc. |
| Expires: August 6, 2018 | February 2, 2018 |
Validate Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
draft-ietf-regext-validate-03
This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) mapping for the validation of contact and eligibility data.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2018.
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document describes a Validate mapping for version 1.0 of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP). This EPP mapping specifies a flexible schema by which EPP clients and servers can reliably validate contact and eligibility data.
With the increased number of restrictions on contacts and required data points (license, ids, etc.) to register a domain name, a way to validate the data points prior to issuing a transform command is becoming more important.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications and examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in the character case presented in order to develop a conforming implementation.
In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and white space in examples are provided only to illustrate element relationships and are not a REQUIRED feature of this protocol.
A EPP validation object has attributes and associated values that can be viewed by the client. This section describes each attribute type in detail.
Key Value provides a flexible mechanism to share data between the client and the server. The <validate:kv> element defines the data, with two required simple attributes, key and value, and an optional contactType attribute for specificity in the response, more details below.
A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found in [RFC5730]. The command mappings described here are specifically for the Validate Extension.
EPP provides three commands to retrieve object information: <check> to determine if an object is known to the server, <info> to retrieve detailed information associated with an object, and <transfer> to retrieve object transfer status information.
The EPP <check> command is used to validate a list of contact information. The <check> command MUST contain a <validate:check> element that identifies the validate namespace. The <validate:check> element contains the following child elements:
The <validate:contact> element MUST contain the following child elements:
The <validate:cd> element MUST contain the following child elements:
The following is an example <check> command.
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"
C: xmlns:validate="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-0.1"
C: xmlns:contact="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <check>
C: <validate:check>
C: <validate:contact contactType="registrant" tld="COM">
C: <validate:cd>
C: <validate:id>sh8013</validate:id>
C: <validate:postalInfo type="int">
C: <contact:name>John Doe</contact:name>
C: <contact:org>Example Inc.</contact:org>
C: <contact:addr>
C: <contact:street>123 Example Dr.</contact:street>
C: <contact:street>Suite 100</contact:street>
C: <contact:city>Dulles</contact:city>
C: <contact:sp>VA</contact:sp>
C: <contact:pc>20166-6503</contact:pc>
C: <contact:cc>US</contact:cc>
C: </contact:addr>
C: </validate:postalInfo>
C: <validate:voice>+1.7035555555</validate:voice>
C: <validate:fax>+1.7035555556</validate:fax>
C: <validate:email>jdoe@example.com</validate:email>
C: <validate:authInfo>
C: <contact:pw>2fooBAR</contact:pw>
C: </validate:authInfo>
C: <validate:disclose flag="0">
C: <contact:voice/>
C: <contact:email/>
C: </validate:disclose>
C: </validate:cd>
C: <validate:kv key="VAT" value="1234567890"/>
C: </validate:contact>
C: <validate:contact contactType="tech" tld="COM">
C: <validate:cd>
C: <validate:id>sh8013</validate:id>
C: </validate:cd>
C: </validate:contact>
C: <validate:contact contactType="admin" tld="COM">
C: <validate:cd>
C: <validate:id>sh8014</validate:id>
C: <validate:postalInfo type="int">
C: <contact:name>John Doe</contact:name>
C: <contact:org>Example Inc.</contact:org>
C: <contact:addr>
C: <contact:street>123 Example Dr.</contact:street>
C: <contact:street>Suite 100</contact:street>
C: <contact:city>Dulles</contact:city>
C: <contact:sp>VA</contact:sp>
C: <contact:pc>20166-6503</contact:pc>
C: <contact:cc>US</contact:cc>
C: </contact:addr>
C: </validate:postalInfo>
C: <validate:voice>+1.7035555555</validate:voice>
C: <validate:fax>+1.7035555556</validate:fax>
C: <validate:email>jdoe@example.com</validate:email>
C: <validate:authInfo>
C: <contact:pw>2fooBAR</contact:pw>
C: </validate:authInfo>
C: <validate:disclose flag="0">
C: <contact:voice/>
C: <contact:email/>
C: </validate:disclose>
C: </validate:cd>
C: </validate:contact>
C: <validate:contact contactType="billing" tld="COM">
C: <validate:cd>
C: <validate:id>sh8014</validate:id>
C: </validate:cd>
C: </validate:contact>
C: </validate:check>
C: </check>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
When a <check> command has been processed succesfully, the EPP <resData> element MUST contain a child <validate:chkData> element that identifies the validate namespace. The <validate:chkData> element MUST contain a <validate:cd> element for each <validate:check> element contained in the <check> command. The <validate:cd> element MUST contain the following child elements:
The following is an example of the <check> response.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <validate:chkData
S: xmlns:validate="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-0.1">
S: <validate:cd>
S: <validate:id>sh8013</validate:id>
S: <validate:response>1000</validate:response>
S: </validate:cd>
S: <validate:cd>
S: <validate:id>sh8014</validate:id>
S: <validate:response>2306</validate:response>
S: <validate:kv key="contact:city" value="City not valid
S: for state."/>
S: <validate:kv contactType="Admin" key="contact:cc"
S: value="Invalid country code for admin, must be mx."/>
S: <validate:kv contactType="Billing" key="VAT" value="VAT
S: required for Billing contact."/>
S: </validate:cd>
S: </validate:chkData>
S: </resData>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-ZYX</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Info semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <info> command.
Transfer semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <transfer> command.
EPP provides five commands to transform objects: <create> to create an instance of an object with a server, <delete> to remove an instance of an object from a server, <renew> to extend the validity period of an object, <transfer> to manage changes in client sponsorship of an object, and <update> to change information.
Create semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <create> command.
Delete semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <delete> command.
Renew semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <renew> command.
Transfer semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <transfer> command.
Update semantics do not apply to validate objects, so there is no mapping defined for the EPP <update> command.
One schema is presented here that is the EPP Validate schema.
The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representation of the object mapping suitable for automated validation of EPP XML instances. The BEGIN and END tags are not part of the schema; they are used to note the beginning and ending of the schema for URI registration purposes.
BEGIN
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<schema
targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-0.1"
xmlns:validate="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-0.1"
xmlns:epp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"
xmlns:eppcom="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"
xmlns:contact="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
elementFormDefault="qualified">
<annotation>
<documentation>
Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0
Validate Object
</documentation>
</annotation>
<!-- Import common element types. -->
<import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"
schemaLocation="eppcom-1.0.xsd"/>
<import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"
schemaLocation="epp-1.0.xsd"/>
<import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0"
schemaLocation="contact-1.0.xsd"/>
<!--
Child elements of the <check> command.
-->
<element name="check" type="validate:checkType"/>
<complexType name="checkType">
<sequence>
<element name="contact"
type="validate:validateContactType"
maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="validateContactType">
<sequence>
<element name="cd"
type="validate:checkDataType"/>
<element name="kv"
type="validate:kvType" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</sequence>
<attribute name="contactType" type="eppcom:labelType"
use="required"/>
<attribute name="tld"
type="eppcom:labelType" use="required"/>
</complexType>
<complexType name="checkDataType">
<sequence>
<element name="id"
type="eppcom:clIDType" />
<element name="postalInfo"
type="contact:postalInfoType"
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="2" />
<element name="voice"
type="contact:e164Type" minOccurs="0" />
<element name="fax"
type="contact:e164Type" minOccurs="0" />
<element name="email"
type="eppcom:minTokenType" minOccurs="0"/>
<element name="authInfo"
type="contact:authInfoType"
minOccurs="0"/>
<element name="disclose"
type="contact:discloseType"
minOccurs="0" />
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="kvType">
<attribute name="contactType"
type="eppcom:labelType" use="optional" />
<attribute name="key"
type="validate:keyType" use="required" />
<attribute name="value"
type="validate:valueType" use="required" />
</complexType>
<simpleType name="keyType">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="1" />
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<simpleType name="valueType">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="0" />
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!--
Child elements of the <check> response.
-->
<element name="chkData" type="validate:chkDataType" />
<complexType name="chkDataType">
<sequence>
<element name="cd"
type="validate:resCreateDataType" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="resCreateDataType">
<sequence>
<element name="id"
type="eppcom:clIDType" />
<element name="response"
type="epp:resultCodeType" />
<element name="kv"
type="validate:kvType"
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</sequence>
</complexType>
</schema>
END
The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any security services beyond those described by EPP and protocol layers used by EPP. The security considerations described in these other specifications apply to this specification as well.
This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. The following URI assignment is requested of IANA:
URI: ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-1.0
Registrant Contact: See the "Author's Address" section of this document.
XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document.
Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to [RFC6982] before publication.
This section records the status of known implementations of the protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC6982]. The description of implementations in this section is intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may exist.
According to [RFC6982], "this will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as they see fit".
Add implementation details once available.
The authors wish to thank the following persons for their feedback and suggestions:
Corrected some formatting issues.
Corrected some formatting issues.
After review and broad feedback, extensive changes have been made transforming the original document from a standalone extension command to using the <check> command and response framework. Stubbed in an Implementation section for later documentation.
Updated miscellaneous verbiage to reflect the change from an extension and changed to ietf naming as REGEXT WG will assume this work.
| [RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997. |
| [RFC3688] | Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004. |
| [RFC5730] | Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009. |