Thank you for your proposal.  I certainly do not want to describe or imply any 
policy around verification code expiry, but I don’t see an issue with the 
inclusion of an optional creation date attribute in the verification code to 
simply capture when the verification code was created.  If an optional crDate 
attribute was supported with the verificationCodeType element on transform 
commands, then it would also be needed in the infoVerificationCodeType element 
to be able to include it in the extension to the info response.  Are there any 
objections with the inclusion of an optional crDate attribute?

Thanks,

—

JG


[cid:77031CC3-BE7A-4188-A95F-D23115A30A4D@vcorp.ad.vrsn.com]

James Gould
Distinguished Engineer
jgo...@verisign.com

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

VerisignInc.com<http://VerisignInc.com>

On May 11, 2016, at 6:57 AM, 周贵卿 
<zhouguiq...@cnnic.cn<mailto:zhouguiq...@cnnic.cn>> wrote:

James,

As described in the draft-gould-eppext-verificationcode-03, CNNIC use this 
model provides verification service as VSP.
In the implementation, I found the schema defined the EPP info command with 
date attribute extension. So  I think about it may useful to add an optional 
attribute of “crDate” to the verificationCodeType, and it represent the date of 
Verification Code generated, it could be define like below:
<complexType name="verificationCodeType">
 <simpleContent>
   <extension base="verificationCode:verificationCodeValueType">
     <attribute name="type" type="token" use="required"/>
     <attribute name="crDate" type="dateTime" use="optional"/>
   </extension>
 </simpleContent>
</complexType>

Although this attribute is not used currently, but may be used in future, 
because a Verification Code may have a expiration for the policy modification 
or improvement. In other words, for example: a label “abc”‘s Verification Code  
which is requested by registrar a years ago may not valid now, because ”abc“ 
may be not a valid word now for some reason.
   That is a assumption, but in practice, that is really occurred. I suggest 
add this attribute, for product and technical point, this attribute may be used 
by some registry, registry can estimate whether a Verification Code is valid  
for create a new domain, for example,  180 days after generated, registrar need 
request a new Verification Code to conform latest policy.

Thank you for kindly attention and Looking forward to your reply,
--
GuiQing Zhou
CNNIC
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org<mailto:regext@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

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

Reply via email to