Thomas, Use of the phase and sub-phase as a mechanism for clients to indicate fee or domain grouping categories was not the intent in draft-ietf-regext-launchphase. At the IETF-98 REGEXT WG meeting it was unclear when there would be overlapping launch phases. The launch phase and sub-phase is meant to cover the launch of the TLD itself, where your overlapping phases does not apply to the TLD but to groups of domains within the TLD. I believe use of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees is the appropriate path forward for the grouping of premium domains and not use of phases and sub-phases in draft-ietf-regext-launchphase. If you fully transition to leverage draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees for premium domain grouping, do you have any need for overlapping launch phases in draft-ietf-regext-launchphase, and if so please describe why?
Thanks, — JG James Gould Distinguished Engineer jgo...@verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> On 8/7/17, 12:45 PM, "Thomas Corte" <thomas.co...@knipp.de> wrote: Hello Jody, On 07/08/2017 18:27, Jody Kolker wrote: > In this paragraph, it sounds like the domain:create command does not need a fee to be sent into create the premium domain. It only needs the correct phase? Is that correct? Yes, requiring registrars to specify the correct phase was exactly our approach to preventing the accidental registration of expensive names. It seemed like a natural solution at the time - the fee extension didn't seem mature (and widespread) enough to be used, and launch phases allowed us to essentially introduce domain/tariff categories without the need for yet another proprietary extension, which we're trying to avoid as much as possible. Later, when the fee extension seemed suitable, we added it as an *alternative* to the launch phase extension. I.e., a registrar can now *either* provide the correct phase *or* supply the expected fees (or both). Yet with the latest changes to the fee extension, our server can no longer truthfully report correct fees since the registrar would have to know the right phase up front, creating a chicken-egg problem. > In your implementation, is the premium phase specified in the "phase" attribute or in the "subphase" attribute? Both approaches are possible, entirely "custom" phases or sub-phases of a standard phase. Best regards, Thomas -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Deutschland Dipl.-Informatiker Tel: +49 231 9703-0 Thomas Corte Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Stellvertretender Leiter SIP: thomas.co...@knipp.de Software-Entwicklung E-Mail: thomas.co...@knipp.de Registereintrag: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Geschäftsführer: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
