.it is interested in the Balance Mapping extension. With regard to the Low Balance Mapping extension, .it has already implemented a poll message with the same meaning.
Mario Inviato da iPhone > Il giorno 15 mag 2019, alle ore 19:52, Gould, James > <jgould=40verisign....@dmarc.ietf.org> ha scritto: > > Thomas, > > I view the balance and credit limit information as separate from the fee > information supported by draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees. The balance and credit > limit information can optionally be returned by draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees, > but I believe it's better to support a specific query mechanism. The Balance > Mapping, which is registered in the EPP Extension Registry > (https://www.iana.org/assignments/epp-extensions/epp-extensions.xhtml), > enables querying for the balance and credit limit information directly. The > Low Balance Mapping, which is also registered in the EPP Extension Registry, > supports a poll message when the available credit falls below a pre-defined > threshold. Is there interest in these extensions? > > — > > JG > > > > James Gould > Distinguished Engineer > jgo...@verisign.com > > 703-948-3271 > 12061 Bluemont Way > Reston, VA 20190 > > Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> > > On 5/15/19, 10:49 AM, "regext on behalf of Thomas Corte (TANGO support)" > <regext-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of thomas.co...@knipp.de> wrote: > > Hello, > > some of our registrars keep asking for a feature to simply inquire their > current account balance and credit limit via EPP. > > As far as I can tell, even the latest fee extension draft > ("draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16") only supports the retrieval of this > information in the response to a *transform* command, but not e.g. in a > check response. > > This isn't ideal since the registrar should not be forced to send a > "dummy" sequence of billable commands (e.g., a domain create/delete or > transfer request/cancel sequence) only to get this information. > Also, even if the registrar would store the values from the most recent > "non-dummy" transform response, they could become obsolete quickly due to > intermittent automatic renewals, or account top-up deposits. > > What's the opinion in this group regarding the addition of an inquiry > feature, e.g. by adding a flag to the <domain:check> command fee > extension, which could trigger the inclusion of the balance/limit in the > <domain:check> fee response extension? > > Best regards, > > Thomas Corte > > -- > TANGO REGISTRY SERVICES® is a product of: > Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH > Technologiepark Phone: +49 231 9703-222 > Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 > D-44227 Dortmund E-Mail: supp...@tango-rs.com > Germany > > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list > regext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext > > > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list > regext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
