--- 1/draft-ietf-regext-validate-03.txt 2018-10-11 14:13:09.961112342 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-regext-validate-04.txt 2018-10-11 14:13:09.989113019 -0700 @@ -1,18 +1,18 @@ Registration Protocols Extensions R. Carney Internet-Draft J. Snitker Intended status: Standards Track GoDaddy Inc. -Expires: August 6, 2018 February 2, 2018 +Expires: April 14, 2019 October 11, 2018 Validate Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) - draft-ietf-regext-validate-03 + draft-ietf-regext-validate-04 Abstract This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) mapping for the validation of contact and eligibility data. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. @@ -20,21 +20,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2018. + This Internet-Draft will expire on April 14, 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 @@ -43,75 +43,95 @@ 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. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Key Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3.1. EPP Query Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 2.2. Validate Id . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.3. Validate PostalInfo, Voice, Fax, Email, AuthInfo . . . . 4 + 3. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 3.1. EPP Query Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1.1. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 3.1.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 3.1.3. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 3.2. EPP Transform Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.2.1. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.2.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.2.3. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.2.4. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.2.5. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 4.1. Validate Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 6.1. XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 7. Implemntation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 7.1. To Be Filled In . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 9. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 9.1. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 9.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 9.3. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 9.4. Change from carney-regext 01 to ietf-regext 00 . . . . . 13 - 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 3.1.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.1.3. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.2. EPP Transform Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.2.1. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.2.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.2.3. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.2.4. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.2.5. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.1. Validate Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 6.1. XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 7. Implemntation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 7.1. To Be Filled In . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 9. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 9.1. Change from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 9.2. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 9.3. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 9.4. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 9.5. Change from carney-regext 01 to ietf-regext 00 . . . . . 15 + 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1. Introduction This document describes a Validate mapping for version 1.0 of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730]. This EPP mapping specifies a flexible schema by which EPP clients and servers can reliably validate contact and eligibility data. With the increased number of restrictions on contacts and required data points (license, ids, etc.) to register a domain name, a way to validate the data points prior to issuing a transform command is becoming more important. 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]. + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and + "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP + 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all + capitals, as shown here. 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. + "validate" is used as an abbreviation for + "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-0.2". The XML namespace prefix + "validate" is used, 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. + 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. + (Note to RFC Editor: remove the following paragraph before + publication as an RFC.) + + The XML namespace prefix above contains a version number, + specifically "0.2". This version number will increment with + successive versions of this document, and will reach 1.0 if and when + this document is published as an RFC. This permits clients to + distinguish which version of the extension a server has implemented. + 2. Object Attributes A EPP validation object has attributes and associated values that can be viewed by the client. This section describes each attribute type in detail. 2.1. Key Value Key Value provides a flexible mechanism to share data between the client and the server. The element defines the data, @@ -113,23 +133,43 @@ 2.1. Key Value Key Value provides a flexible mechanism to share data between the client and the server. The element defines the data, with two required simple attributes, key and value, and an optional contactType attribute for specificity in the response, more details below. o An example . + o An example . +2.2. Validate Id + + The element is used in two different scenarios. + + First if the is passed by itself with no other elements + (e.g. >validate:postalInfo>) then the client intent is that this is + an already existing contact and the server should handle the request + by looking up the associated data in its system and using that data + to validate against. + + Second scenario would be if the request includes additional elements + then the server should treat the as a temporary contact + handle and should not perform a look on the contact but use the data + that is passed in the request to validate against. + +2.3. Validate PostalInfo, Voice, Fax, Email, AuthInfo + + These elements are intended to mirror the definitions in [RFC5733]. + 3. EPP Command Mapping A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found in [RFC5730]. The command mappings described here are specifically for the Validate Extension. 3.1. EPP Query Commands EPP provides three commands to retrieve object information: to determine if an object is known to the server, to retrieve @@ -140,138 +180,151 @@ The EPP command is used to validate a list of contact information. The command MUST contain a element that identifies the validate namespace. The element contains the following child elements: o one or more element(s) for each contact that is to be validated that contains the contact type of the contact to be validated. - The element MUST contain the following child + The element has two required attributes: + contactType, which describes the role (registrant, admin, tech, + billing, etc.) of the contact that the contact should be validated + for; and tld, which provides the top level domain to be validated + against. The element contains the following child elements: - o one element. - o zero or more elements. - - The element MUST contain the following child elements: - - o one element. - o an OPTIONAL element. - o an OPTIONAL element. - o an OPTIONAL element. - o an OPTIONAL element. - o an OPTIONAL element. - o an OPTIONAL element. + o one element (as described in section 2.2). + o an OPTIONAL element (as described in section + 2.3). + o an OPTIONAL element (as described in section + 2.3). + o an OPTIONAL element (as described in section 2.3). + o an OPTIONAL element (as described in section + 2.3). + o an OPTIONAL element (as described in section + 2.3). + o zero or more elements (as described in section 2.1). - The following is an example command. + The following is an example command where "sh8013" and + "sh8014" are both "new" contacts and "sh8012" is an existing contact + on the server. C: C: C: C: C: C: - C: C: sh8013 C: C: John Doe C: Example Inc. C: C: 123 Example Dr. C: Suite 100 C: Dulles C: VA C: 20166-6503 C: US C: C: C: +1.7035555555 C: +1.7035555556 C: jdoe@example.com C: C: 2fooBAR C: - C: - C: - C: - C: - C: C: C: C: - C: - C: sh8013 - C: + C: sh8012 C: C: - C: C: sh8014 C: C: John Doe C: Example Inc. C: C: 123 Example Dr. C: Suite 100 C: Dulles C: VA C: 20166-6503 C: US C: C: C: +1.7035555555 C: +1.7035555556 C: jdoe@example.com C: C: 2fooBAR C: - C: - C: - C: - C: - C: C: C: - C: C: sh8014 - C: + C: + C: John Doe + C: Example Inc. + C: + C: 123 Example Dr. + C: Suite 100 + C: Dulles + C: VA + C: 20166-6503 + C: US + C: + C: + C: +1.7035555555 + C: +1.7035555556 + C: jdoe@example.com + C: + C: 2fooBAR + C: C: C: C: C: ABC-12345 C: C: + When the server receives a command with a + element that contains only a element the server will + process this as an existing contact. If the contact does not exist + the server MUST return an EPP error response for that specific + . + When a command has been processed succesfully, the EPP element MUST contain a child element that identifies the validate namespace. The element MUST contain a element for each element contained in the command. The - element MUST contain the following child elements: + element contains the following child elements: o one element. o one element. o zero or more elements. The following is an example of the response. S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully S: S: S: + S: xmlns:validate="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-0.2"> S: S: sh8013 S: 1000 S: S: S: sh8014 S: 2306 S: S: Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0 Validate Object @@ -377,53 +461,42 @@ - - - - - - - - - - - + + + @@ -462,59 +535,67 @@ type="validate:kvType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" /> END 5. Security Considerations - The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any - security services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730] and - protocol layers used by EPP. The security considerations described - in these other specifications apply to this specification as well. + The mapping described in this document do not provide any security + services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730] and protocol layers + used by EPP. The security considerations described in these other + specifications apply to this specification as well. 6. IANA Considerations 6.1. XML Namespace This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas - conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. The - following URI assignment is requested of IANA: + conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. - URI: ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-1.0 + Registration request for the validate namespace: - Registrant Contact: See the "Author's Address" section of this - document. + URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:validate-1.0 + + Registrant Contact: IESG + + XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification. + + Registration request for the validate schema: + + URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:validate-1.0 + + Registrant Contact: IESG XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document. 7. Implemntation Status Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to - [RFC6982] before publication. + [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 [RFC6982]. + 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 [RFC6982], "this will allow reviewers and working groups + 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". 7.1. To Be Filled In Add implementation details once available. @@ -522,56 +603,76 @@ The authors wish to thank the following persons for their feedback and suggestions: o Kevin Allendorf of GoDaddy Inc. o Jody Kolker of GoDaddy Inc. o James Gould of Verisign Inc 9. Change History -9.1. Change from 02 to 03 +9.1. Change from 03 to 04 + + Removed the element from the command, moving + all sub-elements to the element to simplify. Also + removed the element as it was not needed in this context. + Also updated references to current versions of documents. + +9.2. Change from 02 to 03 Corrected some formatting issues. -9.2. Change from 01 to 02 +9.3. Change from 01 to 02 Corrected some formatting issues. -9.3. Change from 00 to 01 +9.4. Change from 00 to 01 After review and broad feedback, extensive changes have been made transforming the original document from a standalone extension command to using the command and response framework. Stubbed in an Implementation section for later documentation. -9.4. Change from carney-regext 01 to ietf-regext 00 +9.5. Change from carney-regext 01 to ietf-regext 00 Updated miscellaneous verbiage to reflect the change from an extension and changed to ietf naming as REGEXT WG will assume this work. 10. 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, . [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, . [RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009, . + [RFC5733] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) + Contact Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5733, DOI 10.17487/RFC5733, + August 2009, . + + [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, + . + + [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC + 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, + May 2017, . + Authors' Addresses Roger Carney GoDaddy Inc. 14455 N. Hayden Rd. #219 Scottsdale, AZ 85260 US Email: rcarney@godaddy.com URI: http://www.godaddy.com