Internet DRAFT - draft-mcpherson-sattler-ry-transaction-report
draft-mcpherson-sattler-ry-transaction-report
Internet Engineering Task Force N. McPherson
Internet-Draft 1&1 IONOS SE
Intended status: Best Current Practice T. Sattler, Editor
Expires: June 2, 2019 December 3, 2018
Registry Transaction Report
draft-mcpherson-sattler-ry-transaction-report-02
Abstract
This document describes the content of a transaction report based on
the registry report structure and delivered by the registry reporting
repository.
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress".
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 2, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. Internationalized Domain Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Dates and Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Character Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.4. Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Report Headings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Transaction Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Transaction Periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Transaction Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1. Deviating Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Registrar ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Single TLD File Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Multiple TLDs File Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
11. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix A. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix B. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
Modern top-level domain registries provide a number of detailed
reports and documents that their registrars require on a daily,
weekly and monthly basis. These most commonly include transaction
reports, as well as lists containing currently unavailable domains
and current premium domains. These reports are critical for
registrars' businesses and play an important role in accounting and
operations processes as well as in sales and marketing activities.
In the current set-up registrars must download these reports from
each registry's intranet in a different manner according to each
registry's own document management set up.
This document describes the content of a transaction report based on
the [I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-report-structure] and delivered
by the [I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-reporting-repo].
2. Terminology and Definitions
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 [RFC2119] when
specified in their uppercase forms.
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
2.1. Internationalized Domain Names
MUST be as defined in
[I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-report-structure].
2.2. Dates and Times
MUST be as defined in
[I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-report-structure].
2.3. Character Encoding
MUST be as defined in
[I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-report-structure].
2.4. Currency
MUST be as defined in
[I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-report-structure].
3. Report Headings
The first row MUST be the column headings in the following order:
SVTRID Server transaction identifier MUST be assigned
by and MUST be unique to the server.
TLD It MUST contain the top-level domain name formatted
according to section 2.1 of this document.
DOMAIN It MUST contain the domain name formatted according
to section 2.1 of this document.
TIMESTAMP It MUST contain the timestamp of the successful
transaction formatted according to section 2.2 of
this document.
TRANSACTIONTYPE It MUST contain the type of the successful
transaction according to section 4 of this
document.
PERIOD It MUST either contain the Period of the the
successful transaction according to section 5 of
this document or MUST be empty if no Period is
assigned to the transaction.
FEE It MUST contain the fee of the successful
transaction according to section 6 of this
document.
CURRENCY It MUST contain the currency of the successful
transaction according to section 2.4 of this
document.
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
DESCRIPTION It MAY contain a free description of the successful
transaction.
REGISTRARID It MUST contain the registrar ID of the succesful
transaction according to section 7 of this
document.
4. Transaction Types
Each transaction MUST be assigned to a type. Those type MUST either
be 'CREATE', 'RENEWAL', 'AUTORENEW', 'TRANSFER', 'TRADE', 'UPDATE'
or 'RESTORE'.
CREATE A successful domain create within the report period.
RENEWAL A successful explicit domain name renewal executed by the
domain name registrar within the report period.
AUTORENEW A successful domain name auto-renewal by the domain name
registry within the report period.
TRANSFER A successful domain name transfer within the report
period.
TRADE A successful domain name trade within the report
period.
UPDATE A successful billable domain name update within the report
period.
RESTORE A successful domain name restore within the report period.
This event MUST only include the restore fee. Any
additional renewal fee MUST be independently listed.
A successful transaction is also a completed transaction. Therefore,
transactions MUST NOT be deleted. If a transaction MUST be cleared, a
corresponding counter transaction MUST be made.
5. Transaction Periods
Transaction Types usually occur in Periods of 1 to 10 years,
sometimes there are monthly periods. Therefore, each transaction
MUST either have a Period associated or it MUST be empty if no Period
is assigned to the transaction.
The format MUST be in the format <integer><character>, where
<integer> MUST be unsigned and between 1 and 65535, without any
leading zero, and <character> MUST be either 'y' for years or 'm' for
months.
If the number of months results in a full year, then the full year
MUST be used, e.g. instead of 12m or 24m, it should be 1y
respectively 2y.
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
6. Transaction Fees
All transactions MUST have a Fee associated. The fee amount, the
currency and the period MUST be listed separately.
Fees MUST either be whole numbers or rounded to two decimal places.
A period (.) is used as the dividing point.
6.1. Deviating Fees
If a domain name incurs a premium fee, that is not the standard price
for the TLD, a description of the price category SHOULD be given.
7. Registrar ID
A unique registrar ID MUST be listed, with each transaction. Those
IDs MUST be according the IANA registrar IDs (https://www.iana.org/
assignments/registrar-ids/registrar-ids.xhtml) where applicable,
otherwise another unique registrar ID MUST be used.
8. Example
8.1. Single TLD File Example
This is an example of a transaction report for a single top-level
domain .example.
Filename: example_transactions_2018-11.csv.gz
SVTRID,TLD,DOMAIN,TIMESTAMP,TRANSACTIONTYPE,PERIOD,FEE,CURRENCY,
DESCRIPTION,REGISTRARID
54321-XYZ,example,nic.example,2018-11-08T08:01:01Z,AUTORENEW,1y,10,
USD,,1
54322-XYZ,example,foo.example,2018-11-09T08:00:00Z,CREATE,3y,10,USD,,
1
54323-XYZ,example,bar.example,2018-11-09T08:01:01Z,CREATE,1y,1000,
USD,PREMIUM A,1
54324-XYZ,example,foobar.example,2018-11-10T07:00:00Z,RESTORE,,40,USD
,,1
54325-XYZ,example,foobar.example,2018-11-10T07:00:01Z,RENEWAL,,10,USD
,,1
54326-XYZ,example,xn--r8jz45g.example,2018-11-11T06:30:00Z,TRANSFER,
1y,12.75,USD,,1
8.2. Multiple TLDs File Example
This is an example of a transaction report for multi top-level
domains by the example registry.
Filename: example_transactions_2018-11.csv.gz
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
SVTRID,TLD,DOMAIN,TIMESTAMP,TRANSACTIONTYPE,PERIOD,FEE,CURRENCY,
DESCRIPTION,REGISTRARID
54321-XYZ,example,nic.example,2018-11-08T08:01:01Z,AUTORENEW,1y,10,
USD,,1
54322-XYZ,example1,foo.example1,2018-11-09T08:00:00Z,CREATE,6m,9.90,
EUR,,1
54323-XYZ,example2,bar.example2,2018-11-09T08:01:01Z,CREATE,1y,4000,
BRL,PREMIUM C,1
54324-XYZ,xn--0zwm56d,xn--fsqu00a.xn--0zwm56d,2018-11-10T07:00:00Z,
RESTORE,,275,CNY,,1
54325-XYZ,xn--0zwm56d,xn--fsqu00a.xn--0zwm56d,2018-11-10T07:00:01Z,
RENEWAL,,70,CNY,,1
54326-XYZ,xn--zckzah,xn--r8jz45g.xn--zckzah,2018-11-11T06:30:00Z,
TRANSFER,1y,1200,JPY,,1
9. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.
10. Security Considerations
The registry transaction report described in this document does not
provide any security services.
11. Implementation Status
Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to
[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 [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 [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".
Add implementation details once available.
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-report-structure]
McPherson, N. and Sattler, T., "Registry Report Strucutre"
, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mcpherson-
sattler-registry-report-structure/> (work in
progress), November 2018
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
12.2. Informative References
[I-D.mcpherson-sattler-registry-reporting-repo]
McPherson, N. and Sattler, T., "Registry Reporting
Repository", <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
mcpherson-sattler-registry-reporting-repo/> (work in
progress), November 2018
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and Farrel, A., "Improving Awareness of
Running Code: The Implementation Status Section", RFC
7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
Appendix A. Change History
A.1. Change from 00 to 01
Added acknowledgements. Changed Y to lowercase. Fixed csv examples.
Changed security considerations. Added SRTRID to identify
transactions. Clarified successful transaction.
A.2. Change from 01 to 02
Clarified the Period. Fixed numerous typos. Changed limit for Period
from 1-99 to unsigned 16 bit integer.
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Registry Transaction Report December 2018
Appendix B. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the following persons for their feedback
and suggestions (sorted alphabetically by company):
o Jeff Yeh, Brandma
o Elaine Pruis, Domain Research
o Gaurav Vedi, Dominion Registries
Authors' Addresses
Neal McPherson
1&1 IONOS SE
Ernst-Frey-Str. 5
76135 Karlsruhe
DE
Email: neal.mcpherson@ionos.com
URI: https://www.ionos.com
Tobias Sattler
Email: tobias.sattler@me.com
URI: https://tobiassattler.com
McPherson & Sattler Expires June 2, 2019 [Page 8]
