Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-regext-launchphase
draft-ietf-regext-launchphase
Internet Engineering Task Force J. Gould
Internet-Draft VeriSign, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track W. Tan
Expires: June 15, 2018 Cloud Registry
G. Brown
CentralNic Ltd
December 12, 2017
Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
draft-ietf-regext-launchphase-07
Abstract
This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
extension mapping for the provisioning and management of domain name
registrations and applications during the launch of a domain name
registry.
Status of This Memo
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 http://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 June 15, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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
(http://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
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Application Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Validator Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Launch Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.1. Trademark Claims Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4. Status Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.1. State Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.5. Poll Messaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.6. Mark Validation Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6.1. <launch:codeMark> element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.6.2. <mark:mark> element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6.3. Digital Signature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6.3.1. <smd:signedMark> element . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6.3.2. <smd:encodedSignedMark> element . . . . . . . . . 17
3. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1. EPP <check> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.1.1. Claims Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.1.2. Availability Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.1.3. Trademark Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2. EPP <info> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3. EPP <create> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.1. Sunrise Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.2. Claims Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.3.3. General Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3.4. Mixed Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.3.5. Create Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.4. EPP <update> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.5. EPP <delete> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.6. EPP <renew> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.7. EPP <transfer> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.1. Launch Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.1. XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.2. EPP Extension Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.1. Verisign EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.2. Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) SRS . . . . 56
6.3. Verisign .COM / .NET SRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.4. REngin v3.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.5. RegistryEngine EPP Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
6.6. Neustar EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.7. gTLD Shared Registry System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Appendix A. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.3. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.4. Change from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.5. Change from 04 to 05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.6. Change from 05 to 06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.7. Change from 06 to 07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.8. Change from 07 to 08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.9. Change from 08 to 09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.10. Change from 09 to 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A.11. Change from 10 to 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A.12. Change from 11 to 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A.13. Change from 12 to EPPEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A.14. Change EPPEXT 00 to EPPEXT 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A.15. Change EPPEXT 01 to EPPEXT 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A.16. Change EPPEXT 02 to EPPEXT 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.17. Change EPPEXT 03 to EPPEXT 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.18. Change EPPEXT 04 to EPPEXT 05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.19. Change EPPEXT 05 to EPPEXT 06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.20. Change EPPEXT 06 to EPPEXT 07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.21. Change from EPPEXT 07 to REGEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.22. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.23. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.24. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.25. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.26. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A.27. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 . . . . . . . . . . . 67
A.28. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07 . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
1. Introduction
This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the
Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730]. This EPP mapping
specifies a flexible schema that can be used to implement several
common use cases related to the provisioning and management of domain
name registrations and applications during the launch of a domain
name registry.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
It is typical for domain registries to operate in special modes as
they begin operation to facilitate allocation of domain names, often
according to special rules. This document uses the term "launch
phase" and the shorter form "launch" to refer to such a period.
Multiple launch phases and multiple models are supported to enable
the launch of a domain name registry. What is supported and what is
validated is up to server policy. Communication of the server policy
is typically performed using an out-of-band mechanism that is not
specified in this document.
The EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] is designed for the steady-
state operation of a registry. During a launch period, the model in
place may be different from what is defined in the EPP domain name
mapping [RFC5731]. For example, registries often accept multiple
applications for the same domain name during the "Sunrise" launch
phase, referred to as a Launch Application. A Launch Registration
refers to a registration made during a launch phase when the server
uses a "first-come, first-served" model. Even in a "first-come,
first-served" model, additional steps and information might be
required, such as trademark information. In addition, RFC 7848
[RFC7848] defines a registry interface for the Trademark Claims or
"claims" launch phase that includes support for presenting a
Trademark Claims Notice to the Registrant. This document proposes an
extension to the domain name mapping in order to provide a uniform
interface for the management of Launch Applications and Launch
Registrations in launch phases.
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
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 [RFC2119].
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. The
use of "..." is used as shorthand for elements defined outside this
document.
A Launch Registration is a domain name registration during a launch
phase when the server uses a "first-come, first-served" model. Only
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
a single registration for a domain name can exist in the server at a
time.
A Launch Application represents the intent to register a domain name
during a launch phase when the server accepts multiple applications
for a domain name and the server later selects one of the
applications to allocate as a registration. Many Launch Applications
for a domain name can exist in the server at a time.
The XML namespace prefix "launch" is used for the namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0", but implementations MUST NOT
depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser
and serializer to interpret and output the XML documents.
The XML namespace prefix "smd" is used for the [RFC7848] namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0", but implementations MUST NOT
depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser
and serializer to interpret and output the XML documents.
The XML namespace prefix "mark" is used for the [RFC7848] namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0", but implementations MUST NOT
depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser
and serializer to interpret and output the XML documents.
2. Object Attributes
This extension adds additional elements to the EPP domain name
mapping [RFC5731]. Only those new elements are described here.
2.1. Application Identifier
Servers MAY allow multiple applications, referred to as a Launch
Application, of the same domain name during its launch phase
operations. Upon receiving a valid <domain:create> command to create
a Launch Application, the server MUST create an application object
corresponding to the request, assign an application identifier for
the Launch Application, set the [RFC5731] pendingCreate status, and
return the application identifier to the client with the
<launch:applicationID> element. In order to facilitate correlation,
all subsequent launch operations on the Launch Application MUST be
qualified by the previously assigned application identifier using the
<launch:applicationID> element.
2.2. Validator Identifier
The Validator Identifier is the identifier unique to the server, for
a Trademark Validator that validates marks and has a repository of
validated marks. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is used to
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
define the Validator Identifier of the Trademark Validator.
Registries MAY support more than one Third Party Trademark Validator.
The unique set of Validator Identifier values supported by the server
is up to server policy. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN) Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) is the default
Trademark Validator and is reserved the Validator Identifier of
"tmch". If the ICANN TMCH is not used or multiple Trademark
Validators are used, the Validator Identifier MUST be defined using
the "validatorID" attribute.
The Validator Identifier MAY be related to one or more issuer
identifiers of the <mark:id> element and the <smd:id> element defined
in [RFC7848]. Both the Validator Identifier and the Issuer
Identifier used MUST be unique in the server. If the ICANN TMCH is
not used or multiple Trademark Validators are used, the server MUST
define the list of supported validator identifiers and MUST make this
information available to clients using a mutually acceptable, out-of-
band mechanism.
The Validator Identifier may define a non-Trademark Validator that
supports a form of claims, where claims and a Validator Identifier
can be used for purposes beyond trademarks.
2.3. Launch Phases
The server MAY support multiple launch phases sequentially or
simultaneously. The <launch:phase> element MUST be included by the
client to define the target launch phase of the command. The server
SHOULD validate the phase and MAY validate the sub-phase of the
<launch:phase> element against the active phase and OPTIONAL sub-
phase of the server, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if
there is a mismatch.
The following launch phase values are defined:
sunrise: The phase during which trademark holders can submit
registrations or applications with trademark information that can
be validated by the server.
landrush: A post-Sunrise phase when non-trademark holders are
allowed to register domain names with steps taken to address a
large volume of initial registrations.
claims: The phase, as defined in the Section 2.3.1, in which a
Claims Notice must be displayed to a prospective registrant of a
domain name that matches trademarks.
open: A phase that is also referred to as "steady state". Servers
may require additional trademark protection during this phase.
custom: A custom server launch phase that is defined using the
"name" attribute.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
For extensibility, the <launch:phase> element includes an OPTIONAL
"name" attribute that can define a sub-phase, or the full name of the
phase when the <launch:phase> element has the "custom" value. For
example, the "claims" launch phase could have two sub-phases that
include "landrush" and "open".
Launch phases MAY overlap to support the "claims" launch phase,
defined in the Section 2.3.1, and to support a traditional "landrush"
launch phase. The overlap of the "claims" and "landrush" launch
phases SHOULD be handled by setting "claims" as the <launch:phase>
value and setting "landrush" as the sub-phase with the "name"
attribute. For example, the <launch:phase> element should be
<launch:phase name="landrush">claims</launch:phase>.
2.3.1. Trademark Claims Phase
The Trademark Claims Phase is when a Claims Notice must be displayed
to a prospective registrant of a domain name that matches trademarks.
See [I-D.ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec] for additional details of
trademark claims handling. The source of the trademarks is a
Trademark Validator and the source of the Claims Notice information
is a Claim Notice Information Service (CNIS), which may be directly
linked to a Trademark Validator. The client interfaces with the
server to determine if a trademark exists for a domain name,
interfaces with a CNIS to get the Claims Notice information, and
interfaces with the server to pass the Claims Notice acceptance
information in a create command. This document supports the
Trademark Claims Phase in two ways including:
Claims Check Form: Is defined in Section 3.1.1 and is used to
determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks for a
domain name. If there is at least one matching trademark that
exists for the domain name, a claims key is returned. The mapping
of domain names and the claims keys is based on an out-of-band
interface between the server and the Trademark Validator. The
CNIS associated with the claims key Validator Identifier
(Section 2.2) MUST accept the claims key as the basis for
retrieving the claims information.
Claims Create Form: Is defined in Section 3.3.2 and is used to pass
the Claims Notice acceptance information in a create command. The
notice identifier (<launch:noticeID>) format, validation rules,
and server processing is up to the interface between the server
and the Trademark Validator. The CNIS associated with the
Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) MUST generate a notice
identifier compliant with the <launch:noticeID> element.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following shows the Trademark Claims Phase registration flow:
.------------. .--------. .--------. .------.
| Registrant | | Client | | Server | | CNIS |
'------------' '--------' '--------' '------'
| Request Domain | | |
| Registration | | |
|--------------->| Domain Check | |
| |--------------------------->| |
| Domain | Domain Unavailable .------------. |
| Unavailable |<---------------------( Available? ) |
|<---------------| No '------------' |
| | Domain Available | Yes |
| |<---------------------------| |
| | Domain Claims Check | |
| |--------------------------->| |
| | .---------. |
| | Claims Don't Exist / Does \ |
| |<--------------------( Domain have ) |
| | No \ Claims? / |
| | '---------' |
| | Domain Create | | Yes |
| |--------------------------->| | |
| Domain | Domain Registered | | |
| Registered |<---------------------------| | |
|<---------------| | |
| | |
| | Claims Exist with Claims Keys | |
| |<------------------------------' |
| | |
.-----. | | Request Claims Info with Claims Key |
|Abort| | Display |-------------------------------------->|
'-----' | Claims | Return Claims Info |
^ | Notice |<--------------------------------------|
| No |<---------------| |
| .------. Yes | |
'-( Ack? )----------->| Domain Claims Create Form | |
'------' |--------------------------->| |
| Registration | Error .----------------------. |
| Error |<-----------( Validation Successful? ) |
|<---------------| No '----------------------' |
| | | Yes |
| Domain | Domain Registered | |
| Registered |<---------------------------| |
|<---------------| | |
Figure 1
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
2.4. Status Values
A Launch Application or Launch Registration object MAY have a launch
status value. The <launch:status> element is used to convey the
launch status pertaining to the object, beyond what is specified in
the object mapping. A Launch Application or Launch Registration MUST
set the [RFC5731] "pendingCreate" status if a launch status is
supported and the launch status is not one of the final statuses
("allocated" and "rejected").
The following status values are defined using the required "s"
attribute:
pendingValidation: The initial state of a newly-created application
or registration object. The application or registration requires
validation, but the validation process has not yet completed.
validated: The application or registration meets relevant registry
rules.
invalid: The application or registration does not validate according
to registry rules. Server policies permitting, it may transition
back into "pendingValidation" for revalidation, after
modifications are made to ostensibly correct attributes that
caused the validation failure.
pendingAllocation: The allocation of the application or registration
is pending based on the results of some out-of-band process (for
example, an auction).
allocated: The object corresponding to the application or
registration has been provisioned. This is a possible end state
of an application or registration object.
rejected: The application or registration object was not
provisioned. This is a possible end state of an application or
registration object.
custom: A custom status that is defined using the "name" attribute.
Each status value MAY be accompanied by a string of human-readable
text that describes the rationale for the status applied to the
object. The OPTIONAL "lang" attribute, as defined in [RFC5646], MAY
be present to identify the language if the negotiated value is
something other than the default value of "en" (English).
For extensibility the <launch:status> element includes an OPTIONAL
"name" attribute that can define a sub-status or the full name of the
status when the status value is "custom". The server SHOULD use one
of the non-"custom" status values.
Status values MAY be skipped. For example, an application or
registration MAY immediately start at the "allocated" status or an
application or registration MAY skip the "pendingAllocation" status.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
If the launch phase does not require validation of a request, an
application or registration MAY immediately skip to
"pendingAllocation".
2.4.1. State Transition
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The transitions between the states is a matter of server policy.
This diagram defines one possible set of permitted transitions.
| request
|
| +--------------------------+
| | |
v v |
+-------------------+ |
| | |
| pendingValidation +--------------+ |
| | | |
+---------+---------+ | |
| | |
| | |
v v |
+-----------+ +---------+ |
| | | | |
| validated | | invalid +--+
| | | |
+-----+-----+ +----+----+
| |
| |
v |
+-------------------+ |
| | |
| pendingAllocation +-----------+ |
| | | |
+---------+---------+ | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
v v v
+---------+ +--------+
/ \ / \
| allocated | | rejected |
\ / \ /
+---------+ +--------+
Figure 2
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
2.5. Poll Messaging
A Launch Application MUST be handled as an EPP domain name object as
specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with the "pendingCreate" status and
with the launch status values defined in Section 2.4. A Launch
Registration MUST be handled as an EPP domain name object as
specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with the "pendingCreate" status and
with the launch status values defined in Section 2.4 As a Launch
Application or Launch Registration transitions between the status
values defined in Section 2.4, the server SHOULD insert poll
messages, per [RFC5730], for the applicable intermediate statuses,
including the "pendingValidation", "validated", "pendingAllocation,
and "invalid" statuses, using the <domain:infData> element with the
<launch:infData> extension. The <domain:infData> element MAY contain
non-mandatory information, like contact and name server information.
Also, further extensions that would normally be included in the
response of a <domain:info> command, per [RFC5731], MAY be included.
For the final statuses, including the "allocated" and "rejected"
statuses, the server MUST insert a <domain:panData> poll message, per
[RFC5731], with the <launch:infData> extension.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example poll message for a Launch Application
that has transitioned to the "pendingAllocation" state.
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="1301">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
S: </result>
S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate>
S: <msg>Application pendingAllocation.</msg>
S: </msgQ>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:infData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
S: ...
S: </domain:infData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <launch:infData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
S: <launch:status s="pendingAllocation"/>
S: </launch:infData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an
"allocated" Launch Application.
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="1301">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
S: </result>
S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate>
S: <msg>Application successfully allocated.</msg>
S: </msgQ>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:panData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:paTRID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </domain:paTRID>
S: <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate>
S: </domain:panData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <launch:infData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
S: <launch:status s="allocated"/>
S: </launch:infData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an
"allocated" Launch Registration.
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="1301">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
S: </result>
S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate>
S: <msg>Registration successfully allocated.</msg>
S: </msgQ>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:panData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:paTRID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </domain:paTRID>
S: <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate>
S: </domain:panData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <launch:infData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
S: <launch:status s="allocated"/>
S: </launch:infData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
2.6. Mark Validation Models
A server MUST support at least one of the following models for
validating trademark information:
code: Use of a mark code by itself to validate that the mark matches
the domain name. This model is supported using the
<launch:codeMark> element with just the <launch:code> element.
mark: The mark information is passed without any other validation
element. The server will use some custom form of validation to
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
validate that the mark information is authentic. This model is
supported using the <launch:codeMark> element with just the
<mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element.
code with mark: A code is used along with the mark information by
the server to validate the mark utilizing an external party. The
code represents some form of secret that matches the mark
information passed. This model is supported using the
<launch:codeMark> element that contains both the <launch:code> and
the <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements.
signed mark: The mark information is digitally signed as described
in the Digital Signature (Section 2.6.3) section. The digital
signature can be directly validated by the server using the public
key of the external party that created the signed mark using its
private key. This model is supported using the <smd:signedMark>
(Section 2.6.3.1) and <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2)
elements.
More than one <launch:codeMark>, <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1),
or <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) element MAY be
specified. The maximum number of marks per domain name is up to
server policy.
2.6.1. <launch:codeMark> element
The <launch:codeMark> element is used by the "code", "mark", and
"code with mark" validation models, has the following child elements:
<launch:code>: OPTIONAL mark code used to validate the <mark:mark>
(Section 2.6.2) information. The mark code is be a mark-specific
secret that the server can verify against a third party. The
OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier
(Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator that
the code originated from, with no default value.
<mark:mark>: OPTIONAL mark information with child elements defined
in the Mark (Section 2.6.2) section.
The following is an example <launch:codeMark> element with both a
<launch:code> and <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element.
<launch:codeMark>
<launch:code validatorID="sample">
49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code>
<mark:mark xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
...
</mark:mark>
</launch:codeMark>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
2.6.2. <mark:mark> element
A <mark:mark> element describes an applicant's prior right to a given
domain name that is used with the "mark", "mark with code", and the
"signed mark" validation models. The <mark:mark> element is defined
in [RFC7848]. A new mark format can be supported by creating a new
XML schema for the mark that has an element that substitutes for the
<mark:abstractMark> element from [RFC7848].
2.6.3. Digital Signature
Digital signatures MAY be used by the server to validate the mark
information, when using the "signed mark" validation model with the
<smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) element and the
<smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) element. When using
digital signatures the server MUST validate the digital signature.
2.6.3.1. <smd:signedMark> element
The <smd:signedMark> element contains the digitally signed mark
information. The <smd:signedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848].
A new signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML
schema for the signed mark that has an element that substitutes for
the <smd:abstractSignedMark> element from [RFC7848].
2.6.3.2. <smd:encodedSignedMark> element
The <smd:encodedSignedMark> element contains an encoded form of the
digitally signed <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) element. The
<smd:encodedSignedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new
encoded signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML
schema for the encoded signed mark that has an element that
substitutes for the <smd:encodedSignedMark> element from [RFC7848].
3. EPP Command Mapping
A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found
in the EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730]. The command
mappings described here are specifically for use in the Launch Phase
Extension.
This mapping is designed to be flexible, requiring only a minimum set
of required elements.
While it is meant to serve several use cases, it does not prescribe
any interpretation by the client or server. Such processing is
typically highly policy-dependent and therefore specific to
implementations.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Operations on application objects are done via one or more of the
existing EPP verbs defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731].
Registries MAY choose to support a subset of the operations.
3.1. EPP <check> Command
There are three forms of the extension to the EPP <check> command:
the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), the Availability Check Form
(Section 3.1.2), and the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3). The
<launch:check> element "type" attribute defines the form, with the
value of "claims" for the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), with the
value of "avail" for the Availability Check Form (Section 3.1.2), and
with the value of "trademark" for the Trademark Check Form
(Section 3.1.3). The default value of the "type" attribute is
"claims". The forms supported by the server is determined by server
policy. The server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2307 if
it receives a check form that is not supported.
3.1.1. Claims Check Form
The Claims Check Form defines a new command called the Claims Check
Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any
matching trademarks, in the specified launch phase, for each domain
name passed in the command, that requires the use of the "Claims
Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. The availability check
information defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] MUST NOT
be returned for the Claims Check Command. This form is the default
form and MAY be explicitly identified by setting the <launch:check>
"type" attribute to "claims".
Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the Claims
Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching
trademark exists for the domain name, that requires the use of the
"Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. If there is at
least one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a
<launch:claimKey> element is returned. The client MAY then use the
value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain information needed
to generate the Trademark Claims Notice from Trademark Validator
based on the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2). The unique notice
identifier of the Trademark Claims Notice MUST be passed in the
<launch:noticeID> element of the extension to the Create Command
(Section 3.3).
The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check for matching
trademarks. The <launch:check> element contains the following child
elements:
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
<launch:phase>: Contains the value of the active launch phase of the
server. The server SHOULD validate the value according to
Section 2.3.
Example Claims Check command using the <check> domain command and the
<launch:check> extension with the "type" explicitly set to "claims",
to determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example", and
"domain3.example" require claims notices during the "claims" launch
phase:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <check>
C: <domain:check
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:check>
C: </check>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:check
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: type="claims">
C: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase>
C: </launch:check>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
<response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that
identifies the launch namespace. The <launch:chkData> element
contains the following child elements:
<launch:phase>: The phase that mirrors the <launch:phase> element
included in the <launch:check>.
<launch:cd>: One or more <launch:cd> elements that contain the
following child elements:
<launch:name>: Contains the fully qualified name of the queried
domain name. This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute
whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the
domain name that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form"
on a Domain Create Command. A value of "1" (or "true") means
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
that a matching trademark does exist and that the "Claims
Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. A value
of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not
exist or that the "Claims Create Form" is NOT required on a
Domain Create Command.
<launch:claimKey>: Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be
passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN
Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) for querying the information
needed to generate a Trademark Claims Notice. The
<launch:claimKey> is used as the key for the query in place
of the domain name to securely query the service without
using a well-known value like a domain name. The OPTIONAL
"validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier
(Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator
to query for the Claims Notice information, with the default
being the ICANN TMCH. The "validatorID" attribute MAY
reference a non-trademark claims clearinghouse identifier to
support other forms of claims notices.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Example Claims Check response when a claims notice is not required
for the domain name domain1.example, a claims notice is required for
the domain name domain2.example in the "tmch", and a claims notice is
required for the domain name domain3.example in the "tmch" and
"custom-tmch", for the "claims" launch phase:
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: <extension>
S: <launch:chkData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase>
S: <launch:cd>
S: <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name>
S: </launch:cd>
S: <launch:cd>
S: <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name>
S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
S: </launch:claimKey>
S: </launch:cd>
S: <launch:cd>
S: <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name>
S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
S: </launch:claimKey>
S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch">
S: 20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002
S: </launch:claimKey>
S: </launch:cd>
S: </launch:chkData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
3.1.2. Availability Check Form
The Availability Check Form defines additional elements to extend the
EPP <check> command described in the EPP domain name mapping
[RFC5731]. No additional elements are defined for the EPP <check>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
response. This form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check>
"type" attribute to "avail".
The EPP <check> command is used to determine if an object can be
provisioned within a repository. Domain names may be made available
only in unique launch phases, whilst remaining unavailable for
concurrent launch phases. In addition to the elements expressed in
the <domain:check>, the command is extended with the <launch:check>
element that contains the following child elements:
<launch:phase>: The launch phase to which domain name availability
should be determined. The server SHOULD validate the value and
return an EPP error result code of 2306 if it is invalid.
Example Availability Check Form command using the <check> domain
command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set to
"avail", to determine the availability of two domain names in the
"idn-release" custom launch phase:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <check>
C: <domain:check
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:check>
C: </check>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:check
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: type="avail">
C: <launch:phase name="idn-release">custom</launch:phase>
C: </launch:check>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
The Availability Check Form does not define any extension to the
response of an <check> domain command. After processing the command,
the server replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP
domain name mapping [RFC5731].
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.1.3. Trademark Check Form
The Trademark Check Form defines a new command called the Trademark
Check Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any
matching trademarks for each domain name passed in the command,
independent of the active launch phase of the server and whether the
"Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. The
availability check information defined in the EPP domain name mapping
[RFC5731] MUST NOT be returned for the Trademark Check Command. This
form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check> "type"
attribute to "trademark".
Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the
Trademark Check Command will return whether or not at least one
matching trademark exists for the domain name. If there is at least
one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a
<launch:claimKey> element is returned. The client MAY then use the
value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain Trademark Claims
Notice information from Trademark Validator based on the Validator
Identifier (Section 2.2).
The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check for matching
trademarks. The <launch:check> element does not contain any child
elements with the "Trademark Check Form":
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Example Trademark Check command using the <check> domain command and
the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set to "trademark", to
determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example", and
"domain3.example" have any matching trademarks:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <check>
C: <domain:check
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:check>
C: </check>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:check
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: type="trademark"/>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
<response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that
identifies the launch namespace. The <launch:chkData> element
contains the following child elements:
<launch:cd>: One or more <launch:cd> elements that contain the
following child elements:
<launch:name>: Contains the fully qualified name of the queried
domain name. This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute
whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the
domain name. A value of "1" (or "true") means that a
matching trademark does exist. A value of "0" (or "false")
means that a matching trademark does not exist.
<launch:claimKey>: Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be
passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN
Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) for querying the information
needed to generate a Trademark Claims Notice. The
<launch:claimKey> is used as the key for the query in place
of the domain name to securely query the service without
using a well-known value like a domain name. The OPTIONAL
"validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
(Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator
to query for the Claims Notice information, with the default
being the ICANN TMCH. The "validatorID" attribute MAY
reference a non-trademark claims clearinghouse identifier to
support other forms of claims notices.
Example Trademark Check response when no matching trademarks are
found for the domain name domain1.example, matching trademarks are
found for the domain name domain2.example in the "tmch", matching
trademarks are found for domain name domain3.example in the "tmch"
and "custom-tmch", for the "claims" launch phase:
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: <extension>
S: <launch:chkData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:cd>
S: <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name>
S: </launch:cd>
S: <launch:cd>
S: <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name>
S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
S: </launch:claimKey>
S: </launch:cd>
S: <launch:cd>
S: <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name>
S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
S: </launch:claimKey>
S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch">
S: 20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002
S: </launch:claimKey>
S: </launch:cd>
S: </launch:chkData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.2. EPP <info> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <info>
command and response to be used in conjunction with the EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731].
The EPP <info> command is used to retrieve information for a launch
phase registration or application. The Application Identifier
(Section 2.1) returned in the <launch:creData> element of the create
response (Section 3.3) can be used for retrieving information for a
Launch Application. A <launch:info> element is sent along with the
regular <info> domain command. The <launch:info> element includes an
OPTIONAL "includeMark" boolean attribute, with a default value of
"false", to indicate whether or not to include the mark in the
response. The <launch:info> element contains the following child
elements:
<launch:phase>: The phase during which the application or
registration was submitted or is associated with. Server policy
defines the phases that are supported. The server SHOULD
validate the value and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if
it is invalid.
<launch:applicationID>: OPTIONAL application identifier of the
Launch Application.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Example <info> domain command with the <launch:info> extension to
retrieve information for the sunrise application for domain.example
and application identifier "abc123":
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <info>
C: <domain:info
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:info>
C: </info>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:info
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: includeMark="true">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
C: </launch:info>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Example <info> domain command with the <launch:info> extension to
retrieve information for the sunrise registration for domain.example:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <info>
C: <domain:info
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:info>
C: </info>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:info
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: </launch:info>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
If the query was successful, the server replies with a
<launch:infData> element along with the regular EPP <resData>. The
<launch:infData> contains the following child elements:
<launch:phase>: The phase during which the application was
submitted, or is associated with, that matches the associated
<info> command <launch:phase>.
<launch:applicationID>: OPTIONAL Application Identifier of the
Launch Application.
<launch:status>: OPTIONAL status of the Launch Application using one
of the supported status values (Section 2.4).
<mark:mark>: Zero or more <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements only
if the "includeMark" attribute is "true" in the command.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Example <info> domain response using the <launch:infData> extension
with the mark information:
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: <domain:infData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:roid>EXAMPLE1-REP</domain:roid>
S: <domain:status s="pendingCreate"/>
S: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
S: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
S: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
S: <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID>
S: <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID>
S: <domain:crDate>2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate>
S: <domain:authInfo>
S: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
S: </domain:authInfo>
S: </domain:infData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <launch:infData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
S: <launch:status s="pendingValidation"/>
S: <mark:mark
S: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
S: ...
S: </mark:mark>
S: </launch:infData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.3. EPP <create> Command
There are four forms of the extension to the EPP <create> command
that include the Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1), the Claims
Create Form (Section 3.3.2), the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3),
and the Mixed Create Form (Section 3.3.4). The form is dependent on
the supported launch phases (Section 2.3) as defined below.
sunrise: The EPP <create> command with the "sunrise" launch phase is
used to submit a registration with trademark information that can
be verified by the server with the <domain:name> value. The
Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) is used for the "sunrise"
launch phase.
landrush: The EPP <create> command with the "landrush" launch phase
MAY use the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3) to explicitly
specify the phase and optionally define the expected type of
object to create.
claims: The EPP <create> command with the "claims" launch phase is
used to pass the information associated with the presentation and
acceptance of the Claims Notice. The Claims Create Form
(Section 3.3.2) is used and the General Create Form
(Section 3.3.3) MAY be used for the "claims" launch phase.
open: The EPP <create> command with the "open" launch phase is
undefined but the form supported is up to server policy. Use of
the Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be used to pass the
information associated with the presentation and acceptance of the
Claims Notice if required for the domain name.
custom: The EPP <create> command with the "custom" launch phase is
undefined but the form supported is up to server policy.
3.3.1. Sunrise Create Form
The Sunrise Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name
mapping [RFC5731] includes the verifiable trademark information that
the server uses to match against the domain name to authorize the
domain create. A server MUST support one of four models in Claim
Validation Models (Section 2.6) to verify the trademark information
passed by the client.
A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create>
domain command. The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type"
attribute that defines the expected type of object ("application" or
"registration") to create. The server SHOULD validate the "type"
attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be
created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if the type is
incorrect. The <launch:create> element contains the following child
elements:
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
<launch:phase>: The identifier for the launch phase. The server
SHOULD validate the value according to Section 2.3.
<launch:codeMark> or <smd:signedMark> or <smd:encodedSignedMark>:
<launch:codeMark>: Zero or more <launch:codeMark> elements. The
<launch:codeMark> child elements are defined in the
<launch:codeMark> element (Section 2.6.1) section.
<smd:signedMark>: Zero or more <smd:signedMark> elements. The
<smd:signedMark> child elements are defined in the
<smd:signedMark> element (Section 2.6.3.1) section.
<smd:encodedSignedMark>: Zero or more <smd:encodedSignedMark>
elements. The <smd:encodedSignedMark> child elements are
defined in the <smd:encodedSignedMark> element
(Section 2.6.3.2) section.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension, following the "code" validation model,
with multiple sunrise codes:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:code validatorID="sample1">
C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code>
C: </launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:code>49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AD</launch:code>
C: </launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:code validatorID="sample2">
C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AE</launch:code>
C: </launch:codeMark>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension, following the "mark" validation model,
with the mark information:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <launch:codeMark>
C: <mark:mark
C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
C: ...
C: </mark:mark>
C: </launch:codeMark>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension, following the "code with mark" validation
model, with a code and mark information:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:code validatorID="sample">
C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code>
C: <mark:mark
C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
C: ...
C: </mark:mark>
C: </launch:codeMark>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension, following the "signed mark" validation
model, with the signed mark information for a sunrise application:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: type="application">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <smd:signedMark id="signedMark"
C: xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0">
C: ...
C: </smd:signedMark>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension, following the "signed mark" validation
model, with the base64 encoded signed mark information:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <smd:encodedSignedMark
C: xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0">
C: ...
C: </smd:encodedSignedMark>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
3.3.2. Claims Create Form
The Claims Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name
mapping [RFC5731] includes the information related to the
registrant's acceptance of the Claims Notice.
A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create>
domain command. The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type"
attribute that defines the expected type of object ("application" or
"registration") to create. The server SHOULD validate the "type"
attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be
created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if the type is
incorrect. The <launch:create> element contains the following child
elements:
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
<launch:phase>: Contains the value of the active launch phase of the
server. The server SHOULD validate the value according to
Section 2.3.
<launch:notice>: One or more <launch:notice> elements that contain
the following child elements:
<launch:noticeID>: Unique notice identifier for the Claims
Notice. The <launch:noticeID> element has an OPTIONAL
"validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier
(Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator
is the source of the claims notice, with the default being
the ICANN TMCH.
<launch:notAfter>: Expiry of the claims notice.
<launch:acceptedDate>: Contains the date and time that the
claims notice was accepted.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension with the <launch:notice> information for
the "tmch" and the "custom-tmch" validators, for the "claims" launch
phase:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase>
C: <launch:notice>
C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch">
C: 370d0b7c9223372036854775807</launch:noticeID>
C: <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z
C: </launch:notAfter>
C: <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:00.0Z
C: </launch:acceptedDate>
C: </launch:notice>
C: <launch:notice>
C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="custom-tmch">
C: 470d0b7c9223654313275808</launch:noticeID>
C: <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z
C: </launch:notAfter>
C: <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:30.0Z
C: </launch:acceptedDate>
C: </launch:notice>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.3.3. General Create Form
The General Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name
mapping [RFC5731] includes the launch phase and optionally the object
type to create. The OPTIONAL "type" attribute defines the expected
type of object ("application" or "registration") to create. The
server SHOULD validate the "type" attribute, when passed, against the
type of object that will be created, and return an EPP error result
code of 2306 if the type is incorrect.
A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create>
domain command. The <launch:create> element contains the following
child elements:
<launch:phase>: Contains the value of the active launch phase of the
server. The server SHOULD validate the value according to
Section 2.3.
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension for a "landrush" launch phase application:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: type="application">
C: <launch:phase>landrush</launch:phase>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.3.4. Mixed Create Form
The Mixed Create Form supports a mix of the create forms, where for
example the Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) and the Claims Create
Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be supported in a single command by
including both the verified trademark information and the information
related to the registrant's acceptance of the Claims Notice. The
server MAY support the Mixed Create Form. The "custom" launch phase
SHOULD be used when using the Mixed Create Form.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <create> domain command using the
<launch:create> extension, with using a mix of the Sunrise Create
Form (Section 3.3.1) and the Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) by
including both a mark and a notice:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:create
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
C: type="application">
C: <launch:phase name="non-tmch-sunrise">custom</launch:phase>
C: <launch:codeMark>
C: <mark:mark
C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
C: ...
C: </mark:mark>
C: </launch:codeMark>
C: <launch:notice>
C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch">
C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC
C: </launch:noticeID>
C: <launch:notAfter>2012-06-19T10:00:10.0Z
C: </launch:notAfter>
C: <launch:acceptedDate>2012-06-19T09:01:30.0Z
C: </launch:acceptedDate>
C: </launch:notice>
C: </launch:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.3.5. Create Response
If the create was successful, the server MAY add a <launch:creData>
element along to the regular EPP <resData> to indicate the server
generated Application Identifier (Section 2.1), when multiple
applications of a given domain name are supported; otherwise no
extension is included with the regular EPP <resData>. The
<launch:creData> element contains the following child elements:
<launch:phase>: The phase of the application that mirrors the
<launch:phase> element included in the <launch:create>.
<launch:applicationID>: The application identifier of the
application.
An example response when multiple overlapping applications are
supported by the server:
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="1001">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully; action pending</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:creData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:crDate>2010-08-10T15:38:26.623854Z</domain:crDate>
S: </domain:creData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <launch:creData
S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
S: <launch:applicationID>2393-9323-E08C-03B1
S: </launch:applicationID>
S: </launch:creData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.4. EPP <update> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <update>
command to be used in conjunction with the domain name mapping.
An EPP <update> command with the extension sent to a server that does
not support launch applications will fail. A server that does not
support launch applications during its launch phase MUST return an
EPP error result code of 2102 when receiving an EPP <update> command
with the extension.
Registry policies permitting, clients may update an application
object by submitting an EPP <update> command along with a
<launch:update> element to indicate the application object to be
updated. The <launch:update> element contains the following child
elements:
<launch:phase>: The phase during which the application was submitted
or is associated with. The server SHOULD validate the value and
return an EPP error result code of 2306 if it is invalid.
<launch:applicationID>: The application identifier for which the
client wishes to update.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
The following is an example <update> domain command with the
<launch:update> extension to add and remove a name server of a
sunrise application with the application identifier "abc123":
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <update>
C: <domain:update
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:add>
C: <domain:ns>
C: <domain:hostObj>ns2.domain.example</domain:hostObj>
C: </domain:ns>
C: </domain:add>
C: <domain:rem>
C: <domain:ns>
C: <domain:hostObj>ns1.domain.example</domain:hostObj>
C: </domain:ns>
C: </domain:rem>
C: </domain:update>
C: </update>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:update
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
C: </launch:update>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
This extension does not define any extension to the response of an
<update> domain command. After processing the command, the server
replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731].
3.5. EPP <delete> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <delete>
command to be used in conjunction with the domain name mapping.
A client MUST NOT pass the extension on an EPP <delete> command to a
server that does not support launch applications. A server that does
not support launch applications during its launch phase MUST return
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
an EPP error result code of 2102 when receiving an EPP <delete>
command with the extension.
Registry policies permitting, clients MAY withdraw an application by
submitting an EPP <delete> command along with a <launch:delete>
element to indicate the application object to be deleted. The
<launch:delete> element contains the following child elements:
<launch:phase>: The phase during which the application was submitted
or is associated with. The server SHOULD validate the value and
return an EPP error result code of 2306 if it is invalid.
<launch:applicationID>: The application identifier for which the
client wishes to delete.
The following is an example <delete> domain command with the
<launch:delete> extension:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <delete>
C: <domain:delete
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:delete>
C: </delete>
C: <extension>
C: <launch:delete
C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
C: </launch:delete>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
This extension does not define any extension to the response of a
<delete> domain command. After processing the command, the server
replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731].
3.6. EPP <renew> Command
This extension does not define any extension to the EPP <renew>
command or response described in the EPP domain name mapping
[RFC5731].
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3.7. EPP <transfer> Command
This extension does not define any extension to the EPP <transfer>
command or response described in the EPP domain name mapping
[RFC5731].
4. Formal Syntax
One schema is presented here that is the EPP Launch Phase Mapping
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.
4.1. Launch Schema
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors
of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
o Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
o Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
distribution.
o Neither the name of Internet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, nor the
names of specific contributors, may be used to endorse or promote
products derived from this software without specific prior written
permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
"AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
(INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
BEGIN
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<schema
targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
xmlns:eppcom="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"
xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"
xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
>
<!-- Import common element types. -->
<import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"/>
<import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"/>
<import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"/>
<annotation>
<documentation>
Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0
domain name
extension schema
for the launch phase processing.
</documentation>
</annotation>
<!-- Child elements found in EPP commands -->
<element
name="check"
type="launch:checkType"/>
<element
name="info"
type="launch:infoType"/>
<element
name="create"
type="launch:createType"/>
<element
name="update"
type="launch:idContainerType"/>
<element
name="delete"
type="launch:idContainerType"/>
<!-- Common container of id (identifier) element -->
<complexType name="idContainerType">
<sequence>
<element
name="phase"
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
type="launch:phaseType"/>
<element
name="applicationID"
type="launch:applicationIDType"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<!-- Definition for application identifier -->
<simpleType name="applicationIDType">
<restriction base="token"/>
</simpleType>
<!-- Definition for launch phase. Name is an
optional attribute used to extend the phase type.
For example, when using the phase type value
of "custom", the name can be used to specify the
custom phase. -->
<complexType name="phaseType">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="launch:phaseTypeValue">
<attribute
name="name"
type="token"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<!-- Enumeration of launch phase values -->
<simpleType name="phaseTypeValue">
<restriction base="token">
<enumeration value="sunrise"/>
<enumeration value="landrush"/>
<enumeration value="claims"/>
<enumeration value="open"/>
<enumeration value="custom"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!-- Definition for the sunrise code -->
<simpleType name="codeValue">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="1"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<complexType name="codeType">
<simpleContent>
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 48]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
<extension base="launch:codeValue">
<attribute
name="validatorID"
type="launch:validatorIDType"
use="optional"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<!-- Definition for the notice identifier -->
<simpleType name="noticeIDValue">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="1"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<complexType name="noticeIDType">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="launch:noticeIDValue">
<attribute
name="validatorID"
type="launch:validatorIDType"
use="optional"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<!-- Definition for the validator identifier -->
<simpleType name="validatorIDType">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="1"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!-- Possible status values for sunrise application -->
<simpleType name="statusValueType">
<restriction base="token">
<enumeration value="pendingValidation"/>
<enumeration value="validated"/>
<enumeration value="invalid"/>
<enumeration value="pendingAllocation"/>
<enumeration value="allocated"/>
<enumeration value="rejected"/>
<enumeration value="custom"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!-- Status type definition -->
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 49]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
<complexType name="statusType">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="normalizedString">
<attribute
name="s"
type="launch:statusValueType"
use="required"/>
<attribute
name="lang"
type="language"
default="en"/>
<attribute
name="name"
type="token"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<!-- codeMark Type that contains an optional
code with mark information -->
<complexType name="codeMarkType">
<sequence>
<element
name="code"
type="launch:codeType"
minOccurs="0"/>
<element
ref="mark:abstractMark"
minOccurs="0"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<!-- Child elements for the create command -->
<complexType name="createType">
<sequence>
<element
name="phase"
type="launch:phaseType"/>
<choice minOccurs="0">
<element
name="codeMark"
type="launch:codeMarkType"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
<element
ref="smd:abstractSignedMark"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
<element
ref="smd:encodedSignedMark"
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 50]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</choice>
<element
name="notice"
type="launch:createNoticeType"
minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</sequence>
<attribute
name="type"
type="launch:objectType"/>
</complexType>
<!-- Type of launch object -->
<simpleType name="objectType">
<restriction base="token">
<enumeration value="application"/>
<enumeration value="registration"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!-- Child elements of the create notice element -->
<complexType name="createNoticeType">
<sequence>
<element
name="noticeID"
type="launch:noticeIDType"/>
<element
name="notAfter"
type="dateTime"/>
<element
name="acceptedDate"
type="dateTime"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<!-- Child elements of check (Claims Check Command) -->
<complexType name="checkType">
<sequence>
<element
name="phase"
type="launch:phaseType"
minOccurs="0"/>
</sequence>
<attribute
name="type"
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 51]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
type="launch:checkFormType"
default="claims"/>
</complexType>
<!-- Type of check form (Claims Check or Availability Check) -->
<simpleType name="checkFormType">
<restriction base="token">
<enumeration value="claims"/>
<enumeration value="avail"/>
<enumeration value="trademark"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!-- Child elements of info command -->
<complexType name="infoType">
<sequence>
<element
name="phase"
type="launch:phaseType"/>
<element
name="applicationID"
type="launch:applicationIDType"
minOccurs="0"/>
</sequence>
<attribute
name="includeMark"
type="boolean"
default="false"/>
</complexType>
<!-- Child response elements. -->
<element
name="chkData"
type="launch:chkDataType"/>
<element
name="creData"
type="launch:idContainerType"/>
<element
name="infData"
type="launch:infDataType"/>
<!-- <check> response elements. -->
<complexType name="chkDataType">
<sequence>
<element
name="phase"
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 52]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
type="launch:phaseType"
minOccurs="0"/>
<element
name="cd"
type="launch:cdType"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="cdType">
<sequence>
<element
name="name"
type="launch:cdNameType"/>
<element
name="claimKey"
type="launch:claimKeyType"
minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="cdNameType">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="eppcom:labelType">
<attribute
name="exists"
type="boolean"
use="required"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<complexType name="claimKeyType">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="token">
<attribute
name="validatorID"
type="launch:validatorIDType"
use="optional"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<!-- <info> response elements -->
<complexType name="infDataType">
<sequence>
<element
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 53]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
name="phase"
type="launch:phaseType"/>
<element
name="applicationID"
type="launch:applicationIDType"
minOccurs="0"/>
<element
name="status"
type="launch:statusType"
minOccurs="0"/>
<element
ref="mark:abstractMark"
minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
</schema>
END
5. IANA Considerations
5.1. XML Namespace
This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas
conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688].
Registration request for the launch namespace:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0
Registrant Contact: IESG
XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification.
Registration request for the launch XML schema:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:launch-1.0
Registrant Contact: IESG
XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document.
5.2. EPP Extension Registry
The EPP extension described in this document should be registered by
the IANA in the EPP Extension Registry described in [RFC7451]. The
details of the registration are as follows:
Name of Extension: "Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible
Provisioning Protocol (EPP)"
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 54]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Document status: Standards Track
Reference: (insert reference to RFC version of this document)
Registrant Name and Email Address: IESG, <iesg@ietf.org>
TLDs: Any
IPR Disclosure: None
Status: Active
Notes: None
6. Implementation Status
Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to
RFC 7942 [RFC7942] 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 RFC 7942
[RFC7942]. 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 RFC 7942 [RFC7942], "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".
6.1. Verisign EPP SDK
Organization: Verisign Inc.
Name: Verisign EPP SDK
Description: The Verisign EPP SDK includes both a full client
implementation and a full server stub implementation of draft-ietf-
regext-launchphase.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 55]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All aspects of the protocol are implemented.
Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License
Contact: jgould@verisign.com
URL: http://www.verisigninc.com/en_US/channel-resources/domain-
registry-products/epp-sdks
6.2. Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) SRS
Organization: Verisign Inc.
Name: Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) Shared Registry
System (SRS)
Description: The Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) Shared
Registry System (SRS) implements the server-side of draft-ietf-
regext-launchphase for a variety of Top Level Domains (TLD's).
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: The "signed mark" Mark Validation Model, the Claims Check
Form for the EPP <check> Command, the Sunrise and Claims Forms for
the EPP <create> Command of Launch Registrations and Launch
Applications. For Launch Applications the Poll Messaging, the EPP
<info> Command, the EPP <update> Command, and the EPP <delete>
Command is covered.
Licensing: Proprietary
Contact: jgould@verisign.com
6.3. Verisign .COM / .NET SRS
Organization: Verisign Inc.
Name: Verisign .COM / .NET Shared Registry System (SRS)
Description: The Verisign Shared Registry System (SRS) for .COM, .NET
and other IDN TLD's implements the server-side of draft-ietf-regext-
launchphase.
Level of maturity: Operational Test Environment (OTE)
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 56]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Coverage: The "signed mark" Mark Validation Model, the Claims Check
Form for the EPP <check> Command, the Sunrise and Claims Forms for
the EPP <create> Command of Launch Registrations.
Licensing: Proprietary
Contact: jgould@verisign.com
6.4. REngin v3.7
Organization: Domain Name Services (Pty) Ltd
Name: REngin v3.7
Description: Server side implementation only
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All features from version 12 have been implemented
Licensing: Proprietary Licensing with Maintenance Contracts
Contact: info@dnservices.co.za
URL: https://www.registry.net.za and soon http://dnservices.co.za
6.5. RegistryEngine EPP Service
Organization: CentralNic
Name: RegistryEngine EPP Service
Description: Generic high-volume EPP service for gTLDs, ccTLDs and
SLDs
Level of maturity: Deployed in CentralNic's production environment as
well as two other gTLD registry systems, and two ccTLD registry
systems.
Coverage: Majority of elements including TMCH sunrise, landrush and
TM claims as well as sunrise applications validated using codes.
Licensing: Proprietary In-House software
Contact: epp@centralnic.com
URL: https://www.centralnic.com
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 57]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
6.6. Neustar EPP SDK
Organization: Neustar
Name: Neustar EPP SDK
Description: The Neustar EPP SDK includes client implementation of
draft-ietf-regext-launchphase in both Java and C++.
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All aspects of the protocol are implemented.
Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License
Contact: trung.tran@neustar.biz
6.7. gTLD Shared Registry System
Organization: Stichting Internet Domeinnaamregistratie Nederland
(SIDN)
Name: gTLD Shared Registry System
Description: The gTLD SRS implements the server side of the draft-
ietf-regext-launchphase.
Level of maturity: (soon) Production
Coverage: The following parts of the draft are supported:
Signed mark validation model using Digital Signature
(Section 2.6.3)
Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1)
Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1)
Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2)
The parts of the document not described here are not implemented.
Licensing: Proprietary
Contact: rik.ribbers@sidn.nl
7. Security Considerations
The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any
security services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730], the EPP
domain name mapping [RFC5731], and protocol layers used by EPP. The
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 58]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
security considerations described in these other specifications apply
to this specification as well.
Updates to, and deletion of an application object MUST be restricted
to clients authorized to perform the said operation on the object.
Information contained within an application, or even the mere fact
that an application exists may be confidential. Any attempt to
operate on an application object by an unauthorized client MUST be
rejected with an EPP 2201 (authorization error) return code. Server
policy may allow <info> operation with filtered output by clients
other than the sponsoring client, in which case the <domain:infData>
and <launch:infData> response SHOULD be filtered to include only
fields that are publicly accessible.
8. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts of the leading
participants of the Community TMCH Model that led to many of the
changes to this document, which include Chris Wright, Jeff Neuman,
Jeff Eckhaus, and Will Shorter.
Special suggestions that have been incorporated into this document
were provided by Harald Alvestrand, Ben Campbell, Spencer Dawkins,
Jothan Frakes, Keith Gaughan, Seth Goldman, Scott Hollenbeck, Michael
Holloway, Jan Jansen, Rubens Kuhl, Mirja Kuhlewind, Warren Kumari,
Ben Levac, Gustavo Lozano, Klaus Malorny, Alexander Mayrhofer, Alexey
Melnikov, Patrick Mevzek, James Mitchell, Francisco Obispo, Mike
O'Connell, Eric Rescoria, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer, Sabrina Tanamal,
Trung Tran, Ulrich Wisser and Sharon Wodjenski.
Some of the description of the Trademark Claims Phase was based on
the work done by Gustavo Lozano in the ICANN TMCH functional
specifications.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 59]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
[RFC5646] Phillips, A., Ed. and M. Davis, Ed., "Tags for Identifying
Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, DOI 10.17487/RFC5646,
September 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5646>.
[RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.
[RFC5731] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc5731>.
[RFC7848] Lozano, G., "Mark and Signed Mark Objects Mapping",
RFC 7848, DOI 10.17487/RFC7848, June 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7848>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec]
Lozano, G., "ICANN TMCH functional specifications", draft-
ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-03 (work in progress), July
2017.
[RFC7451] Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for the Extensible
Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451,
February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>.
Appendix A. Change History
A.1. Change from 00 to 01
1. Changed to use camel case for the XML elements.
2. Replaced "cancelled" status to "rejected" status.
3. Added the child elements of the <claim> element.
4. Removed the XML schema and replaced with "[TBD]".
A.2. Change from 01 to 02
1. Added support for both the ICANN and ARI/Neustar TMCH models.
2. Changed the namespace URI and prefix to use "launch" instead of
"launchphase".
3. Added definition of multiple claim validation models.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 60]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
4. Added the <launch:signedClaim> and <launch:signedNotice>
elements.
5. Added support for Claims Info Command
A.3. Change from 02 to 03
1. Removed XSI namespace per Keith Gaughan's suggestion on the
provreg list.
2. Added extensibility to the launch:status element and added the
pendingAuction status per Trung Tran's feedback on the provreg
list.
3. Added support for the Claims Check Command, updated the location
and contents of the signedNotice, and replaced most references of
Claim to Mark based on the work being done on the ARI/Neustar
launch model.
A.4. Change from 03 to 04
1. Removed references to the ICANN model.
2. Removed support for the Claims Info Command.
3. Removed use of the signedClaim.
4. Revised the method for referring to the signedClaim from the XML
Signature using the IDREF URI.
5. Split the launch-1.0.xsd into three XML schemas including launch-
1.0.xsd, signeMark-1.0.xsd, and mark-1.0.xsd.
6. Split the "claims" launch phase to the "claims1" and "claims2"
launch phases.
7. Added support for the encodedSignedMark with base64 encoded
signedMark.
8. Changed the elements in the createNoticeType to include the
noticeID, timestamp, and the source elements.
9. Added the class and effectiveDate elements to mark.
A.5. Change from 04 to 05
1. Removed reference to <smd:zone> in the <smd:signedMark> example.
2. Incorporated feedback from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer on the
provreg mail list.
3. Added missing launch XML prefix to applicationIDType reference in
the idContainerType of the Launch Schema.
4. Added missing description of the <mark:pc> element in the
<mark:addr> element.
5. Updated note on replication of the EPP contact mapping elements
in the Mark Contact section.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 61]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
A.6. Change from 05 to 06
1. Removed the definition of the mark-1.0 and signedMark-1.0 and
replaced with reference to draft-lozano-smd, that contains the
definition for the mark, signed marked, and encoded signed mark.
2. Split the <launch:timestamp> into <launch:generatedDate> and
<launch:acceptedDate> based on feedback from Trung Tran.
3. Added the "includeMark" optional attribute to the <launch:info>
element to enable the client to request whether or not to include
the mark in the info response.
4. Fixed state diagram to remove redundant transition from "invalid"
to "rejected"; thanks Klaus Malorny.
A.7. Change from 06 to 07
1. Proof-read grammar and spelling.
2. Changed "pendingAuction" status to "pendingAllocation", changed
"pending" to "pendingValidation" status, per proposal from Trung
Tran and seconded by Rubens Kuhl.
3. Added text related to the use of RFC 5731 pendingCreate to the
Application Identifier section.
4. Added the Poll Messaging section to define the use of poll
messaging for intermediate state transitions and pending action
poll messaging for final state transitions.
A.8. Change from 07 to 08
1. Added support for use of the launch statuses and poll messaging
for Launch Registrations based on feedback from Sharon Wodjenski
and Trung Tran.
2. Incorporated changes based on updates or clarifications in draft-
lozano-tmch-func-spec-01, which include:
1. Removed the unused <launch:generatedDate> element.
2. Removed the <launch:source> element.
3. Added the <launch:notAfter> element based on the required
<tmNotice:notAfter> element.
A.9. Change from 08 to 09
1. Made <choice> element optional in <launch:create> to allow
passing just the <launch:phase> in <launch:create> per request
from Ben Levac.
2. Added optional "type" attribute in <launch:create> to enable the
client to explicitly define the desired type of object
(application or registration) to create to all forms of the
create extension.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 62]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
3. Added text that the server SHOULD validate the <launch:phase>
element in the Launch Phases section.
4. Add the "General Create Form" to the create command extension to
support the request from Ben Levac.
5. Updated the text for the Poll Messaging section based on feedback
from Klaus Malorny.
6. Replaced the "claims1" and "claims2" phases with the "claims"
phase based on discussion on the provreg list.
7. Added support for a mixed create model (Sunrise Create Model and
Claims Create Model), where a trademark (encoded signed mark,
etc.) and notice can be passed, based on a request from James
Mitchell.
8. Added text for the handling of the overlapping "claims" and
"landrush" launch phases.
9. Added support for two check forms (claims check form and
availability check form) based on a request from James Mitchell.
The availability check form was based on the text in draft-rbp-
application-epp-mapping.
A.10. Change from 09 to 10
1. Changed noticeIDType from base64Binary to token to be compatible
with draft-lozano-tmch-func-spec-05.
2. Changed codeType from base64Binary to token to be more generic.
3. Updated based on feedback from Alexander Mayrhofer, which
include:
1. Changed "extension to the domain name extension" to
"extension to the domain name mapping".
2. Changed use of 2004 return code to 2306 return code when
phase passed mismatches active phase and sub-phase.
3. Changed description of "allocated" and "rejected" statuses.
4. Moved sentence on a synchronous <domain:create> command
without the use of an intermediate application, then an
Application Identifier MAY not be needed to the Application
Identifier section.
5. Restructured the Mark Validation Models section to include
the "<launch:codeMark> element" sub-section, the
"<mark:mark> element" sub-section, and the Digital Signature
sub-section.
6. Changed "Registries may" to "Registries MAY".
7. Changed "extensed" to "extended" in "Availability Check
Form" section.
8. Broke the mix of create forms in the "EPP <create> Command"
section to a fourth "Mixed Create Form" with its own sub-
section.
9. Removed "displayed or" from "displayed or accepted" in the
<launch:acceptedDate> description.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 63]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
10. Replaced "given domain name is supported" with "given domain
name are supported" in the "Create Response" section.
11. Changed the reference of 2303 (object does not exist) in the
"Security Considerations" section to 2201 (authorization
error).
12. Added arrow from "invalid" status to "pendingValidation"
status and "pendingAllocation" status to "rejected" status
in the State Transition Diagram.
4. Added the "C:" and "S:" example prefixes and related text in the
"Conventions Used in This Document" section.
A.11. Change from 10 to 11
1. Moved the claims check response <launch:chkData> element under
the <extension> element instead of the <resData> element based on
the request from Francisco Obispo.
A.12. Change from 11 to 12
1. Added support for multiple validator identifiers for claims
notices and marks based on a request and text provided by Mike
O'Connell.
2. Removed domain:exDate element from example in section 3.3.5 based
on a request from Seth Goldman on the provreg list.
3. Added clarifying text for clients not passing the launch
extension on update and delete commands to servers that do not
support launch applications based on a request from Sharon
Wodjenski on the provreg list.
A.13. Change from 12 to EPPEXT 00
1. Changed to eppext working group draft by changing draft-tan-epp-
launchphase to draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase and by changing
references of draft-lozano-tmch-smd to draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-
smd.
A.14. Change EPPEXT 00 to EPPEXT 01
1. Removed text associated with support for the combining of status
values based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek on the provreg
mailing list, discussion on the eppext mailing list, and
discussion at the eppext IETF meeting on March 6, 2014.
A.15. Change EPPEXT 01 to EPPEXT 02
1. Changed the <launch:claim> element to be zero or more elements
and the <launch:notice> element to be one or more elements in the
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 64]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Claims Create Form. These changes were needed to be able to
support more than one concurrent claims services.
A.16. Change EPPEXT 02 to EPPEXT 03
1. Added the "Implementation Status" section based on an action item
from the eppext IETF-91 meeting.
2. Moved Section 7 "IANA Considerations" and Section 9 "Security
Considerations" before Section 5 "Acknowledgements". Moved
"Change Log" Section to end.
3. Updated the text for the Claims Check Form and the Claims Create
Form to support checking for the need of the claims notice and
passing the claims notice outside of the "claims" phase.
4. Added the new Trademark Check Form to support determining whether
or not a trademark exists that matches the domain name
independent of whether a claims notice is required on create.
This was based on a request from Trung Tran and a discussion on
the eppext mailing list.
A.17. Change EPPEXT 03 to EPPEXT 04
1. Amended XML Namespace section of IANA Considerations, added EPP
Extension Registry section.
A.18. Change EPPEXT 04 to EPPEXT 05
1. Added a missing comma to the descripton of the <launch:phase>
element, based on feedback from Keith Gaughan on the eppext
mailing list.
2. Added the SIDN implementation status information.
3. Fixed a few indentation issues in the samples.
A.19. Change EPPEXT 05 to EPPEXT 06
1. Removed duplicate "TMCH Functional Specification" URIs based on
feedback from Scott Hollenbeck on the eppext mailing list.
2. Changed references of example?.tld to domain?.example to be
consistent with RFC 6761 based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck
on the eppext mailing list.
3. A template was added to section 5 to register the XML schema in
addition to the namespace based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck
on the eppext mailing list.
A.20. Change EPPEXT 06 to EPPEXT 07
1. Changed reference of lozano-tmch-func-spec to ietf-eppext-tmch-
func-spec.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 65]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
A.21. Change from EPPEXT 07 to REGEXT 00
1. Changed to regext working group draft by changing draft-ietf-
eppext-launchphase to draft-ietf-regext-launchphase and by
changing references of draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-func-spec to draft-
ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec.
A.22. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01
1. Fixed reference of Claims Check Command to Trademark Check
Command in the Trademark Check Form section.
2. Replaced reference of draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-smd to RFC 7848.
A.23. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02
1. Removed the reference to ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec and briefly
described the trademark claims phase that is relavent to draft-
ietf-regext-launchphase.
A.24. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03
1. Ping update.
A.25. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04
1. Updates based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck that include:
1. Nit on reference to RFC 7848 in section 1.
2. Added reference to <domain:create> for the request to create
a Launch Application in section 2.1.
3. Removed the second paragraph of section 2.1 describing the
option of creating an application identifier for a Launch
Registration.
4. Provided clarification in section 2.2 on the responsibility
of the server to ensure that the supported validator
identifiers are unique.
5. Updated the text in section 2.5 referencing the domain name
object in RFC 5731.
6. Updated the copyright to 2017 in section 4.1.
A.26. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05
1. Updates based on feedback from Ulrich Wisser that include:
1. Updated reference to obsoleted RFC 6982 with RFC 7942.
2. Moved RFC 7451 reference from normative to informative.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 66]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
A.27. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06
1. Updates based on feedback from Adam Roach that include:
1. Added an informative reference to draft-ietf-regext-tmch-
func-spec in section 2.3.1 "Trademark Claims Phase".
2. Added formal definition of a Launch Registration and Launch
Application to section 1.1.
3. Updated the description of the Validator Identifier to
indicate that the uniqueness is based on server policy.
4. Updated "Does Domain have Claims?" "No" and "Yes" branch
labels in Figure 1.
5. Updated the description of the <launch:phase> element in the
commands to explicitly specify the return of a 2306 EPP
error result when invalid or referring to section 2.3 for
validation.
6. Fixed indentation of the <launch:applicationID> and
<launch:status> elements in the section 2.5 examples.
7. Updated the description of the <mark:mark> element in the
info response.
8. Added returning an EPP error result code of 2306 if the
"type" attribute is incorrect in section 3.3.1, 3.3.2, and
3.3.3.
9. Made small change in the description of the Create Response
in section 3.3.5.
10. Updated the Registrant Contact in section 7 to the IESG.
A.28. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07
1. Updates based on feedback from Mirja Kuhlewind that include:
1. In the Security Considerations section, change must to MUST
in "Updates to, and deletion of an application object MUST be
restricted to clients authorized to perform the said
operation on the object".
2. Updates based on feedback from Warren Kumari that include:
1. Removed the comma from "The Validator Identifier is the
identifier, that is unique..." not needed due to change from
Harald Alvestrand's feedback.
3. Updates based on feedback from Alexey Melnikov that include:
1. Added a Normative Reference to RFC 5646 for the "language"
attribute.
2. Replace identifer with identifier".
3. Remove "for" in "Enumeration of for launch phase values"
4. Updates based on feedback from Harald Alvestrand that include:
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 67]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
1. Removed the references to the unused "launch-1.0",
"signedMark-1.0", and "mark-1.0" abbreviations and revised
the XML namespace prefix definitions for "launch", "smd", and
"mark".
2. Replace "that is unique to the server" to "unique to the
server" in the Validator Identifier section.
3. Replaced ", including the "allocated" and "rejected"
statuses" with "("allocated" and "rejected")" in the Status
Values section.
4. Replaced "Is a possible end state" with "This is a possible
end state" in the definition of the "allocated" and
"rejected" statuses in the Status Values section.
5. Add the preamble "The transitions between the states is a
matter of server policy. This diagram defines one possible
set of permitted transitions." to the State Transition
diagram.
6. Split the first sentence of the Poll Messaging section into
two sentences, one for the Launch Application and one for the
Launch Registration.
7. Remove "either" and replace "or" with an "and" in the first
sentence of the Digital Signature section for clarity and to
be more consistent with the description of the "signed mark"
validation model.
5. Updates based on feedback from Ben Campbell that include:
1. Replacement of "that" with "which" in the first sentence of
the Validator Identifier section not needed due change from
Harald Alvestrand's feedback.
2. Avoid using RFC 2119 in the Launch Phases definitions, which
resulted in change MAY to may in the definition of the
"open" phase and MUST to must in the definition of the
"claims" phase.
3. Change "SHOULD" to "should" in the sentence "For example,
the <launch:phase> element SHOULD be <launch:phase
name="landrush">claims</launch:phase>".
4. Change "MUST" to "must" in the sentence "The Trademark
Claims Phase is when a Claims Notice MUST be displayed to a
prospective registrant of a domain name that matches
trademarks".
5. Change "MAY" to "may" in the sentence "Claim Notice
Information Service (CNIS), which MAY be directly linked to
a Trademark Validator.", where MAY can be lowercase may".
6. Remove "that" from the sentence "The <launch:codeMark>
element that is used by the "code", "mark", and "code with
mark" validation models, has the following child elements".
7. Added the consistent use of colons ":" at the end of the
hangText labels to address adding whitespace between handing
indent list entries.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 68]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
8. Revised the first sentence, of the second paragraph, of the
"EPP <update> Command" section, to read "An EPP <update>
command with the extension sent to a server that does not
support launch applications will fail.".
9. Revised the "The server SHOULD NOT use the "custom" status
value" to "The server SHOULD use one of the non-"custom"
status values" in the Status Values section.
10. Revised "Both the Validator Identifier and the Issuer
Identifier used MUST be unique" to "Both the Validator
Identifier and the Issuer Identifier used MUST be unique in
the server" in the Validator Identifier section.
11. Revised "The Validator Identifier MAY define a non-Trademark
Validator that supports a form of claims" to "The Validator
Identifier may define a non-Trademark Validator that
supports a form of claims, where claims and a Validator
Identifier can be used for purposes beyond trademarks" in
the Validator Identifier section.
6. Updates based on feedback from Eric Rescoria that include:
1. Replaced the duplicate Claims Check Form and Claims Create
Form in the list of the two ways the document supports the
Trademark Claims Phase, to refer to the section by number
instead of by name.
2. Added "The use of "..." is used as shorthand for elements
defined outside this document" added to the "In examples,..."
paragraph of the Conventions Used in This Document section.
3. Added "When using digital signatures the server MUST validate
the digital signature" to the Digital Signature section.
4. Removed "post-launch" to the description of the "open" phase
in the Launch Phases section.
5. Add the sentences "Multiple launch phases and multiple models
are supported to enable the launch of a domain name registry.
What is supported and what is validated is up to server
policy. Communication of the server policy is typically
performed using an out-of-band mechanism that is not
specified in this document." to the second paragraph of the
Introduction section.
7. Updates based on feedback from Spencer Dawkins that include:
1. Replace "during their initial launch" with "as they begin
operation" in the Introduction section.
8. Updates based on feedback from Sabrina Tanamal that include:
1. Pretty print the XML schema to address inconsistent
indenting.
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 69]
Internet-Draft Launch Phase Mapping for EPP December 2017
Authors' Addresses
James Gould
VeriSign, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
US
Email: jgould@verisign.com
URI: http://www.verisigninc.com
Wil Tan
Cloud Registry
Suite 32 Seabridge House
377 Kent St
Sydney, NSW 2000
AU
Phone: +61 414 710899
Email: wil@cloudregistry.net
URI: http://www.cloudregistry.net
Gavin Brown
CentralNic Ltd
35-39 Mooregate
London, England EC2R 6AR
GB
Phone: +44 20 33 88 0600
Email: gavin.brown@centralnic.com
URI: https://www.centralnic.com
Gould, et al. Expires June 15, 2018 [Page 70]
