mands. It might be better to specify the
list of commands (create, renew, transfer) that must have period element.
Thanks,
Tongfeng Zhang
-Original Message-
From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Mevzek
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 11:01 AM
To: regext@iet
quot;domain delete" could be a pure
negate of the transactions at "domain create".
So if in domain create, we are allowing a "credit", we should allow a fee in
domain delete.
So I suggest making the "delData" element in the formal XML schema also a "
t
milar extensions in your registry.
Appreciated if you could share your experience (pros and cons). Also, would
like to know your onion on a making such extension a standard.
Thanks,
Tongfeng Zhang (CIRA)
___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
will determine in what language we send messages to the
contact.
Thanks,
Tongfeng
From: Gould, James [mailto:jgo...@verisign.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 2:38 PM
To: Tongfeng Zhang; regext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [regext] EPP extension to take in generic key value pairs
Hi,
We created a key
.
Tongfeng
From: Gould, James [mailto:jgo...@verisign.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 1:36 PM
To: Tongfeng Zhang; regext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [regext] EPP extension to take in generic key value pairs
Hi,
Passing the extra data via a key / value pair extension or with use of a new
specific
At .ca and all the TLDs CIRA operates, we have a similar feature of registry
lock.
We are interested in standardization for sure.
There is a regiOps workshop coming up in May in Bangkok. I see a fit there if
regext is not the right place.
Cheers,
Tongfeng
-Original Message-
From: re
