Taras,

Thank you for your feedback.  

It looks like for use case #1 (create command of EAI address with non-EAI 
supporting server) the preference is for a mix of "Collect ASCII value from 
registrant" and " Use proxy ASCII value" based on registrar policy, where a 
valid email address MUST be provided.  For use case #2 (info response of EAI 
address with non-EAI supporting client) the preference is for the registry to 
return a 2308 “data management policy violation” error to fast-fail for a 
non-EAI registrar.  

Based on the above, the definition and use of the predefined placeholder value 
would be removed from the draft and updated with the preferred approaches to 
address use case #1 and #2. 

Are there any other thoughts on how to address these two use cases?

Thanks,

-- 
 
JG



James Gould
Fellow Engineer
jgo...@verisign.com 
<applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/jgo...@verisign.com>

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

Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/>

On 8/4/21, 4:18 PM, "Taras Heichenko" <ta...@academ.kiev.ua> wrote:

    Hi James, all.

    > On 4 Aug 2021, at 15:38, Gould, James 
<jgould=40verisign....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > 
    > Thank you for your perspective for use case #2 (info response of EAI 
address with non-EAI supporting client). Do you have any thoughts related to 
use case #1 (create command of EAI address with non-EAI supporting server), 
with the following options:
    >  
    >   • ASCII placeholder value – The current proposal is the use of 
e...@empty.as112.arpa.  The assumption is that using a placeholder value is not 
the preferred option based on your feedback on use case 2.
    >   • Collect ASCII value from registrant – This is counter to the goal of 
supporting EAI, so it would only be done to pass a compliant value to a non-EAI 
supporting server.
    >   • Use proxy ASCII value – The EAI registrar would need to be able to 
support EAI registrants and mix of EAI-supporting registries by providing a 
ASCII proxy value to a non-EAI-supporting registry.  The proxy value to use 
would be up to registrar policy.
    >   • A mix of the above options.

    I think that the main point is registrar must do everything to set an email 
address that provides the registrant with mail concerning the domain. 
Placeholder is not the case. All other looks appropriate. The registrar should 
explain to a registrant that the correct email address is much more important 
than EAI. If a registrar has good marketing it can make an ASCII proxy email 
for a registrant (and offer it as an additional but free service :) ). But 
provide a valid working address in registrant information is a must minimum.

    >  
    > Thanks,
    >  
    > --
    >  
    > JG
    >  
    >  
    >  
    > James Gould
    > Fellow Engineer
    > jgo...@verisign.com 
<applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/jgo...@verisign.com>
    >  
    > 703-948-3271
    > 12061 Bluemont Way
    > Reston, VA 20190
    >  
    > Verisign.com 
<http://secure-web.cisco.com/1XcmZvNWKvKNxdkB8z9Dw9YSZBqD0qjFxHnTJENRM6aia1UGFckfv2xd1T2taB2RX7Qltk_3csqItb58nEI3a56xblluH6M8_RLGPcslIHCuck5CGMwcwSC6JXoLS2IJDAZPuptkZfsxypIEh-5oBUpz2td7RVUg5RRwNu0NMd0PipYr-0weoOnzSYvXYwLE0vY8Z_C_s2WnErwRrlmj36mKRtYgV1o_QNCS8YjR_bcLALBYhqUDGELAtxzXiSfk9AaikKoMmO5gGwRqUAxGZwQ/http%3A%2F%2Fverisigninc.com%2F>
    >  
    > On 8/4/21, 2:21 AM, "Taras Heichenko" <ta...@academ.kiev.ua> wrote:
    >  
    >  
    >     > On 2 Aug 2021, at 21:08, Gould, James 
<jgould=40verisign....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    >     >
    >     > Thomas,
    >     > 
    >     > For use case #2 (info response of EAI address with non-EAI 
supporting client), your preference is to return a failure.  Is 2308 “data 
management policy violation” the best error code in your opinion?  Do others 
agree that for this use case the server should return an error to a non-EAI 
supporting client in place of returning a successful response with a predefined 
placeholder value for the required email element when the value is an EAI 
address?  For this use case the most likely scenario is that the querying 
client is the non-sponsoring client, since they didn't create the contact.
    >  
    >     Just my 2 cents. There are two kinds of registrar-registry 
participants in the registration process. The first type tries to keep eye on 
the changes and go according to fresh standards. The second one once made a 
system and the system still works. If we propose to use a placeholder we make 
the domains of clients of second-type organizations in danger (as reasonably 
stated in some previous letters). The 2308 error will make the second type of 
organization do something to fix this error. I think it is fairer towards 
clients.
    >  
    >     > 
    >     > For use case #1, what is your proposal for the value that the 
sponsoring registrar should provide with the create command to a non-EAI 
supporting server?  I see the following options:
    >     > 
    >     >         • ASCII placeholder value – The current proposal is the use 
of e...@empty.as112.arpa.  The assumption is that using a placeholder value is 
not the preferred option based on your feedback on use case 2.
    >     >         • Collect ASCII value from registrant – This is counter to 
the goal of supporting EAI, so it would only be done to pass a compliant value 
to a non-EAI supporting server.
    >     >         • Use proxy ASCII value – The EAI registrar would need to 
be able to support EAI registrants and mix for EAI-supporting registries by 
providing a ASCII proxy value to a non-EAI-supporting registry.  The proxy 
value to use would be up to registrar policy.
    >     >         • A mix of the above options.
    >     > 
    >     > Are there other options to consider?  Do you have a preference for 
the options?
    >     > 
    >     > Thanks,
    >     > 
    >     > --
    >     > 
    >     > JG
    >     > 
    >     > 
    >     > 
    >     > James Gould
    >     > Fellow Engineer
    >     > jgo...@verisign.com 
<applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/jgo...@verisign.com>
    >     > 
    >     > 703-948-3271
    >     > 12061 Bluemont Way
    >     > Reston, VA 20190
    >     > 
    >     > Verisign.com 
<http://secure-web.cisco.com/1PHuclgRnODnxi08jze4h0Fc6ZDfqcf71AxEZJQwD1h-ADa8Fui9DXZeDCapk7W9UO0YsaVHOEocbt0xlvpEzcy1bIaZjrRhsxv5m-uTvMv3KJQ9bccE2avzNV2nquwEiLrhqo5pEYQhFrbHPzdgYW-SPkeWrW0oNO0KiRIQOAlC8-m-aEpz-TxsSK3N8bJRP0JgeZQzX4mt2xsoB6vMATbG5H_DN3unVvgoFh4FdvhnxPtowM_YcsNCcCjnsBDgp/http%3A%2F%2Fverisigninc.com%2F>
    >     > 
    >     > On 8/2/21, 11:42 AM, "regext on behalf of Thomas Corte (TANGO 
support)" <regext-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of thomas.co...@knipp.de> wrote:
    >     > 
    >     >     Hello,
    >     > 
    >     >     On 8/2/21 15:50, Gould, James wrote:
    >     > 
    >     >     >  2. EPP Contact <info> Response
    >     >     >     
(https://secure-web.cisco.com/1FgtS7m-xW-ZevXhWmnVO4Srd-o3ZnXlxd56BLZKCbdGU5qI0hxTWtvLd4sUE43gHtwFpwFZGUHjTdiQysEwr5nt_BCtNz9doKwi9fntdIrIA-c0BaLLhweuIYp6sCPoQsk7eOpDme8ANbDJf1TEXNsr91wlDi4uSjIj_yXdgrWgnC9PwEyVsz7W5uXKw5DmWUwHTTvBRoHg2eGd1PcDa5yzzl7BOcS0X1u0jhWnlWSi2BOhu08sa4CvC82wkjwqz/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Frfc5733%23section-3.1.2
    >     >     >     
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1FgtS7m-xW-ZevXhWmnVO4Srd-o3ZnXlxd56BLZKCbdGU5qI0hxTWtvLd4sUE43gHtwFpwFZGUHjTdiQysEwr5nt_BCtNz9doKwi9fntdIrIA-c0BaLLhweuIYp6sCPoQsk7eOpDme8ANbDJf1TEXNsr91wlDi4uSjIj_yXdgrWgnC9PwEyVsz7W5uXKw5DmWUwHTTvBRoHg2eGd1PcDa5yzzl7BOcS0X1u0jhWnlWSi2BOhu08sa4CvC82wkjwqz/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Frfc5733%23section-3.1.2>)
 - The
    >     >     >     <contact:email> element is required, which poses an issue 
when the
    >     >     >     registry supports EAI and the querying registrar does not 
support
    >     >     >     EAI.  The querying registrar could be any registrar and 
not just the
    >     >     >     sponsoring registrar, where there is only a single email 
value in the
    >     >     >     registry that is an EAI address for this use case.  What 
should the
    >     >     >     registry return to the non-EAI supporting registrar?  
This case is
    >     >     >     even more challenging then case #1 since registry has a 
single value
    >     >     >     and there can be a mix of EAI supporting querying 
registrars.  One
    >     >     >     alternative is to return an error response (e.g., 2308 
“data
    >     >     >     management policy violation”) instead of a successful 
response with a
    >     >     >     predefined placeholder value,  but that seems harsh to me.
    >     > 
    >     >     It does seem harsh, but it's (in my opinion) the better option 
than to
    >     >     return a syntactically valid placeholder value for the e-mail, 
as that
    >     >     placeholder value will - for registrars not supporting EAI - 
most likely
    >     >     end up being used as the "real" e-mail address for the contact, 
causing
    >     >     problems down the line, for example when the registrar tries to 
send
    >     >     verification e-mails to the contact for ICANN WAP compliance. 
These mails
    >     >     will bounce, which very often goes unnoticed, and domains may be
    >     >     suspended as a result. In this scenario, it's better to "fail 
fast", i.e.
    >     >     let the inquiry of the contact's data fail with the 2308 error, 
which
    >     >     will immediately point the registrar to a systemic problem that 
needs to
    >     >     be addressed.
    >     > 
    >     >     Best regards,
    >     > 
    >     >     Thomas
    >     > 
    >     >     --
    >     >     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://secure-web.cisco.com/1KZbdbAPsaLa4OVdLtJihtpwdRk9fr_3G8g2mwx2jxOLL1sJ-eNhJwsOpo6W7ol32J_DzfjBAXa_Cw90o-bJSF0gBmXB6ESXuldajgmC3M50OyC92n_wRtUNo_XZxV-q617Ou591BoL72Nkten6pxWXT59Gx3wDODJPp1wp7OaV-Z6cj2rlRN7NM8UF2_IkjVUpxBNnG1Yxn7iIr2ZZbbgcQT_95-2rVq6WMVlGKV4PAAoyx95sLzddSZb6G18znD/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext
    >     > _______________________________________________
    >     > regext mailing list
    >     > regext@ietf.org
    >     > 
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1-wLqPO0ixnhSnv1bDHgAd4KDuL9XlUf2kLemKcLN1uOGg1Zcxdue7KVINRgsoiqMJLodH1xVHDovABPgsnQ2NWGWNDNEsTE4mEjmJ_1cidAJDGry0Cu-9UTKV6iJSwYj_etvg8wVYXmOFarHFW_9Jk-5Mj47BW0F4-cRfAoaszOvMAC2uMGkyBZ1C6wucOpCAtWYUtdifA9J40SBzM0JxIcF1OA1HvrVSbCnC_UAE6s_bMEBfz_5KWstPbEVOroi/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext
    >  
    >     --
    >     Taras Heichenko
    >     ta...@academ.kiev.ua
    >  
    >  
    >  
    >  
    >  
    > _______________________________________________
    > regext mailing list
    > regext@ietf.org
    > 
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1ZLroGD5rLvS_7JbtpLLl1m_Zl3YBt7rskEI7_7UoW-3Yx6zn12XE1rNRYd4qtONsCDr0dcskptt48GGZMVuXs1yc3qdG1RiAGN2rT1g8jt2bwDWEwE9gCXBZoloEX7xvXy_uQjbi3625X2QnVqfiuW8VwK542JPW5YCs0mNx6sMFF5u6tspyM75YcJaco9Zts2ntKUEQnUdqFQgjP9ipXhG-RSawD29XQgNzOkvF1JQJHqIeXbXC09GmVdJKnFr8AkcMDcHapjc65wpvI85wlw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext

    --
    Taras Heichenko
    ta...@academ.kiev.ua






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

Reply via email to