Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping Extension for Strict Bundling Registration
RFC 9095
This RFC was published on the Independent Submission stream.
This RFC is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
| Document | Type |
RFC
- Informational
(July 2021)
Was
draft-yao-regext-bundling-registration
(individual)
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Jiankang Yao , Linlin Zhou , Hongtao Li , Ning Kong , Jiagui Xie | ||
| Last updated | 2021-08-01 | ||
| RFC stream | Independent Submission | ||
| Formats | |||
| IESG | Responsible AD | (None) | |
| Send notices to | (None) |
RFC 9095
Independent Submission J. Yao
Request for Comments: 9095 L. Zhou
Category: Informational H. Li
ISSN: 2070-1721 CNNIC
N. Kong
Consultant
J. Xie
July 2021
Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping Extension for
Strict Bundling Registration
Abstract
This document describes an extension of Extensible Provisioning
Protocol (EPP) domain name mapping for the provisioning and
management of strict bundling registration of domain names.
Specified in XML, this mapping extends the EPP domain name mapping to
provide additional features required for the provisioning of bundled
domain names. This is a nonstandard proprietary extension.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.
This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other
RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
its discretion and makes no statement about its value for
implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by
the RFC Editor are not candidates for any level of Internet Standard;
see Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9095.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Terminology
3. Overview
4. Requirement for Bundling Registration of Names
5. Object Attributes
5.1. RDN
5.2. BDN
6. EPP Command Mapping
6.1. EPP Query Commands
6.1.1. EPP <check> Command
6.1.2. EPP <info> Command
6.1.3. EPP <transfer> Query Command
6.2. EPP Transform Commands
6.2.1. EPP <create> Command
6.2.2. EPP <delete> Command
6.2.3. EPP <renew> Command
6.2.4. EPP <transfer> Command
6.2.5. EPP <update> Command
7. Formal Syntax
8. Internationalization Considerations
9. IANA Considerations
9.1. XML Namespace and XML Schema
9.1.1. BDN Namespace
9.1.2. BDN XML Schema
9.2. EPP Extension
10. Security Considerations
11. References
11.1. Normative References
11.2. Informative References
Acknowledgements
Authors' Addresses
1. Introduction
In RFC 4290 [RFC4290], the "variant(s)" are character(s) and/or
string(s) that are treated as equivalent to the base character. In
this document, variants are those strings that are treated as
equivalent to each other according to the domain name registration
policy. Bundled domain names are those that share the same Top-Level
Domain (TLD) but whose second-level labels are variants or those that
have identical second-level labels for which certain parameters are
shared in different TLDs. For example, the Public Interest Registry
has requested to implement bundling of second-level domains for .NGO
and .ONG. So we have two kinds of bundled domain names. The first
one is in the form of "V-label.TLD", in which the second-level label
(V-label) is a variant sharing the same TLD. The second one is in
the form of "LABEL.V-tld", in which the second-level label (LABEL)
remains the same but ends with a different TLD (V-tld) and these
different V-tlds are managed by the same entity.
Bundled domain names normally share some attributes. Policy-wise
bundling can be implemented in three ways. The first one is strict
bundling, which requires all bundled names to share many of the same
attributes. When creating, updating, or transferring any of the
bundled domain names, all bundled domain names will be created,
updated, or transferred atomically. The second one is partial
bundling, which requires the bundled domain names to be registered by
the same registrant. The third one is relaxed bundling, which has no
specific requirements on the domain registration. This document
mainly addresses the strict bundling name registration.
For the name variants, different registries have different policies.
Some registries adopt the policy that variant Internationalized
Domain Names (IDNs) should be blocked. But some registries adopt the
policy that variant IDNs that are identified as equivalent are
allocated or delegated to the same registrant. For example, most
registries offering a Chinese Domain Name (CDN) adopt a registration
policy whereby a registrant can apply for an original CDN in any
form: Simplified Chinese (SC) form, Traditional Chinese (TC) form, or
other variant forms. The corresponding variant CDN in SC form and in
TC form will also be delegated to the same registrant. All variant
names in the same TLD share a common set of attributes. This
document mainly discusses the situation in which variant IDNs that
are identified as equivalent are allocated or delegated to the same
registrant.
The basic Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) domain name mapping
[RFC5731] provides the facility for single domain name registration.
It does not specify how to register the strict bundled names that
share many of the attributes.
In order to meet the above requirements of strict bundled name
registration, this document describes an extension of the EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731] for the provisioning and management of bundled
names. This document describes a nonstandard proprietary extension.
This extension is especially useful for registries performing Chinese
Domain Name registration. This method is also useful for other
language domain names that have similar issues with Chinese Domain
Names. This document is specified using Extensible Markup Language
(XML) 1.0 as described in [W3C.REC-xml-20040204] and XML Schema
notation as described in [W3C.REC-xmlschema-1-20041028] and
[W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028].
The EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730] provides a complete
description of EPP command and response structures. A thorough
understanding of the base protocol specification is necessary to
understand the extension mapping described in this document.
This document uses many IDN concepts, so a thorough understanding of
the IDNs for Application (IDNA, described in [RFC5890], [RFC5891],
and [RFC5892]) and the variant approach discussed in [RFC4290] is
assumed.
2. Terminology
Variants in this document are those strings that are treated as
equivalent to each other according to the domain name registration
policy for certain TLDs.
Bundled domain names are bundled together according to the domain
name registration policy. For example, many Chinese Domain Name
registries follow the principle described in RFC 3743 [RFC3743].
Bundled domain names should belong to the same owner. If bundled
domain names are under different TLDs, those TLDs should be managed
by the same entity.
The terms "registered domain name" (RDN) and "bundled domain name"
(BDN) are used in this document. RDN represents the valid domain
name that registrants submitted for the initial registration. BDN
represents the bundled domain name produced according to the bundled
domain name registration policy. In current practice, the number of
BDNs is usually kept at one according to the registration policy set
by the registry. Both the RDN and BDN specified in this document
will be registered via EPP. All other domain names related to the
RDN will be blocked.
The "uLabel" attribute in this document is used to express the
U-label of an Internationalized Domain Name as a series of characters
where non-ASCII characters will be represented in the format of
"&#xXXXX;" where XXXX is a Unicode point by using the XML escaping
mechanism. The U-label is defined in [RFC5890]. This document
chooses this format of literal HTML ampersand codes, not the expected
Unicode character codes. Unicode characters may not be displayed
correctly in some text file readers, while HTML numeric character
references are easy for HTML processors. The implementation
following this document should use Unicode characters directly.
This document uses the prefix "b-dn" for the namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn" throughout. Implementations cannot
assume that any particular prefix is used and must employ a
namespace-aware XML parser and serializer to interpret and output the
XML documents.
In the examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client, and
"S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and
spacing in the examples are provided only to illustrate element
relationships and are not a required feature of this specification.
XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, the XML
specifications and examples provided in this document must be
interpreted in the character case presented to develop a conforming
implementation.
3. Overview
Domain registries have usually adopted a registration model whereby
metadata relating to a domain name, such as its expiration date and
sponsoring registrar, are stored as properties of the domain object.
The domain object is then considered an atomic unit of registration
on which operations such as update, renewal, and deletion may be
performed.
Bundled names brought about the need for multiple domain names to be
registered and managed as a single package. In this model, the
registry typically accepts a domain registration request (i.e., EPP
domain <create> command) containing the domain name to be registered.
This domain name is referred to as the RDN in this document. As part
of the processing of the registration request, the registry generates
a set of bundled names that are related to the RDN, either
programmatically or with the guidance of registration policies, and
places them in the registration package together with the RDN.
The bundled names share many properties, such as expiration date and
sponsoring registrar, by sharing the same domain object. So when
registrants update any property of a domain object within a bundle
package, that property will be updated at the same time for all other
domain objects in the bundle package.
4. Requirement for Bundling Registration of Names
The bundled names, whether they are in the form of "V-label.TLD" or
"LABEL.V-tld", should share some parameters or attributes associated
with domain names. Typically, bundled names will share the following
parameters or attributes:
* Registrar ownership
* Registration and expiry dates
* Registrant, admin, billing, and technical contacts
* Name server association
* Domain status
* Applicable grace periods (add grace period, renew grace period,
auto-renew grace period, transfer grace period, and redemption
grace period) [RFC3915]
Because the domain names are bundled and share the same parameters or
attributes, the EPP command should do some processing for these
requirements:
* When performing a domain <check> command, either the BDN or RDN
can be queried with the EPP command and will return the same
response.
* When performing a domain <info> command, either the BDN or RDN can
be queried, and the same response will include both BDN and RDN
information with the same attributes.
* When performing a domain <create> command, if the domain name is
available, both the BDN and RDN will be registered.
* When performing a domain <delete> command, either the BDN or RDN
will be accepted. If the domain name is registered, both the BDN
and RDN will be deleted.
* When performing a domain <renew> command, either the BDN or RDN
will be accepted. Upon a successful domain renewal, both the BDN
and RDN will have their expiry date extended by the requested
term. Upon a successful domain renewal, both the BDN and RDN will
conform to the same renew grace period.
* When performing a domain <transfer> command, either the BDN or RDN
will be accepted. Upon successful completion of a domain transfer
request, both the BDN and RDN will enter a pendingTransfer status.
Upon approval of the transfer request, both the BDN and RDN will
be owned and managed by the same new registrant.
* When performing a domain <update> command, either the BDN or RDN
will be accepted. Any modifications to contact associations, name
server associations, domain status values, and authorization
information will be applied to both the BDN and RDN.
5. Object Attributes
This extension defines the following additional elements to the EPP
domain name mapping [RFC5731]. All of these additional elements are
returned from the <domain:info> command.
5.1. RDN
The RDN is an ASCII name or an IDN with the A-label [RFC5890] form.
In this document, its corresponding element is <b-dn:rdn>. An
optional attribute "uLabel" associated with <b-dn:rdn> is used to
represent the U-label [RFC5890] form.
For example:
<b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example"> xn--
fsq270a.example</b-dn:rdn>
5.2. BDN
The BDN is an ASCII name or an IDN with the A-label [RFC5890] form
that is converted from the corresponding BDN. In this document, its
corresponding element is <b-dn:bdn>. An optional attribute "uLabel"
associated with <b-dn:bdn> is used to represent the U-label [RFC5890]
form.
For example:
<b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example"> xn--
fsqz41a.example</b-dn:bdn>
6. EPP Command Mapping
A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found
in the EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730]. The command
mappings described here are specifically for use in provisioning and
managing bundled names via EPP.
6.1. EPP Query Commands
EPP provides three commands to retrieve domain information: <check>
to determine if a domain object can be provisioned within a
repository, <info> to retrieve detailed information associated with a
domain object, and <transfer> to retrieve domain-object transfer
status information.
6.1.1. EPP <check> Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <check> command or
<check> response described in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731].
However, when either the RDN or BDN is sent for a check, the response
should contain both RDN and BDN information, which may also give some
explanation in the reason field to tell the registrant that the
associated domain name is a produced name according to some bundle
domain name policy.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:chkData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:cd>
S: <domain:name avail="1">
S: xn--fsq270a.example</domain:name>
S: </domain:cd>
S: <domain:cd>
S: <domain:name avail="1">
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </domain:name>
S: <domain:reason>This associated domain name is
S: a produced name based on bundle name policy.
S: </domain:reason>
S: </domain:cd>
S: </domain:chkData>
S: </resData>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 1: Example <check> Response
6.1.2. EPP <info> Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <info> command
described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. However, additional
elements are defined for the <info> response.
When an <info> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
<resData> element must contain child elements as described in the EPP
domain mapping [RFC5731]. In addition, unless some registration
policy has some special processing, the EPP <extension> element
should contain a child <b-dn:infData> element that identifies the
extension namespace if the domain object has data associated with
this extension and based on its registration policy. The
<b-dn:infData> element contains the <b-dn:bundle>, which has the
following child elements:
* A <b-dn:rdn> element that contains the RDN, along with the
attribute described below.
* An optional <b-dn:bdn> element that contains the BDN, along with
the attribute described below.
The above elements contain the following attribute:
* An optional "uLabel" attribute represents the U-label of the
element.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:infData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>xn--fsq270a.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:roid>58812678-domain</domain:roid>
S: <domain:status s="ok"/>
S: <domain:registrant>123</domain:registrant>
S: <domain:contact type="admin">123</domain:contact>
S: <domain:contact type="tech">123</domain:contact>
S: <domain:ns>
S: <domain:hostObj>ns1.example.cn
S: </domain:hostObj>
S: </domain:ns>
S: <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID>
S: <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID>
S: <domain:crDate>2019-04-03T22:00:00.0Z
S: </domain:crDate>
S: <domain:exDate>2022-04-03T22:00:00.0Z
S: </domain:exDate>
S: <domain:authInfo>
S: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
S: </domain:authInfo>
S: </domain:infData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <b-dn:infData
S: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
S: <b-dn:bundle>
S: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example">
S: xn--fsq270a.example
S: </b-dn:rdn>
S: <b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example">
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </b-dn:bdn>
S: </b-dn:bundle>
S: </b-dn:infData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 2: Example <info> Response for an Authorized Client
The <info> response for the unauthorized client has not been changed,
see [RFC5731] for details.
An EPP error response must be returned if an <info> command cannot be
processed for any reason.
6.1.3. EPP <transfer> Query Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <transfer> command
or <transfer> response described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731].
6.2. EPP Transform Commands
EPP provides five commands to transform domain objects: <create> to
create an instance of a domain object, <delete> to delete an instance
of a domain object, <renew> to extend the validity period of a domain
object, <transfer> to manage domain object sponsorship changes, and
<update> to change information associated with a domain object.
When these commands have been processed successfully, the EPP
<resData> element must contain child elements as described in the EPP
domain mapping [RFC5731]. Unless some registration policy has some
special processing, this EPP <extension> element should contain the
<b-dn:bundle>, which has the following child elements:
* A <b-dn:rdn> element that contains the RDN, along with the
attribute described below.
* An optional <b-dn:bdn> element that contains the BDN, along with
the attribute described below.
The above elements contain the following attribute:
* An optional "uLabel" attribute represents the U-label of the
element.
6.2.1. EPP <create> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <create>
command described in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] for
bundled names registration.
In addition to the EPP command elements described in the EPP domain
mapping [RFC5731], the <create> command shall contain an <extension>
element. Unless some registration policy has some special
processing, the <extension> element should contain a child
<b-dn:create> element that identifies the bundle namespace and a
child <b-dn:rdn> element that identifies the U-label form of the
registered domain name with the "uLabel" attribute. The U-label is
used for easy reading by the registrants and easy debugging by the
registrars and the registries.
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>xn--fsq270a.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:period unit="y">2</domain:period>
C: <domain:registrant>123</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">123</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">123</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <b-dn:create
C: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
C: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example">
C: xn--fsq270a.example
C: </b-dn:rdn>
C: </b-dn:create>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Figure 3: Example <create> Command
When a <create> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
<creData> element must contain child elements as described in the EPP
domain mapping [RFC5731]. In addition, unless some registration
policy has some special processing, the EPP <extension> element
should contain a child <b-dn:creData> element that identifies the
extension namespace if the domain object has data associated with
this extension and based on its registration policy. The
<b-dn:creData> element contains the <b-dn:bundle> element.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:creData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>xn--fsq270a.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:crDate>2019-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate>
S: <domain:exDate>2021-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:exDate>
S: </domain:creData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <b-dn:creData
S: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
S: <b-dn:bundle>
S: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example">
S: xn--fsq270a.example
S: </b-dn:rdn>
S: <b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example" >
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </b-dn:bdn>
S: </b-dn:bundle>
S: </b-dn:creData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 4: Example <create> Response
An EPP error response must be returned if a <create> command cannot
be processed for any reason.
6.2.2. EPP <delete> Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <delete> command
described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. However, additional
elements are defined for the <delete> response.
When a <delete> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
<delData> element must contain child elements as described in the EPP
domain mapping [RFC5731]. In addition, unless some registration
policy has some special processing, the EPP <extension> element
should contain a child <b-dn:delData> element that identifies the
extension namespace if the domain object has data associated with
this extension and based on its registration policy. The
<b-dn:delData> element should contain the <b-dn:bundle> element.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <extension>
S: <b-dn:delData
S: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
S: <b-dn:bundle>
S: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example">
S: xn--fsq270a.example
S: </b-dn:rdn>
S: <b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example">
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </b-dn:bdn>
S: </b-dn:bundle>
S: </b-dn:delData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 5: Example <delete> Response
An EPP error response must be returned if a <delete> command cannot
be processed for any reason.
6.2.3. EPP <renew> Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <renew> command
described in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. However, when
either the RDN or BDN is sent for renewal, the response should
contain both RDN and BDN information. When the command has been
processed successfully, the EPP <extension> element shall be
contained in the response if the domain object has data associated
with bundled names. Unless some registration policy has some special
processing, this EPP <extension> element should contain the
<b-dn:renData>, which contains the <b-dn:bundle> element.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:renData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>xn--fsq270a.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:exDate>2022-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:exDate>
S: </domain:renData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <b-dn:renData
S: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
S: <b-dn:bundle>
S: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example">
S: xn--fsq270a.example
S: </b-dn:rdn>
S: <b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example" >
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </b-dn:bdn>
S: </b-dn:bundle>
S: </b-dn:renData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 6: Example <renew> Response
6.2.4. EPP <transfer> Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <transfer> command
described in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. However,
additional elements are defined for the <transfer> response in the
EPP object mapping. When the command has been processed
successfully, the EPP <extension> element shall be contained in the
response if the domain object has data associated with bundled names.
Unless some registration policy has some special processing, this EPP
<extension> element should contain the <b-dn:trnData>, which contains
the <b-dn:bundle> element.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1001">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully; action pending</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:trnData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>xn--fsq270a.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:trStatus>pending</domain:trStatus>
S: <domain:reID>ClientX</domain:reID>
S: <domain:reDate>2021-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:reDate>
S: <domain:acID>ClientY</domain:acID>
S: <domain:acDate>2021-04-08T22:00:00.0Z</domain:acDate>
S: <domain:exDate>2022-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:exDate>
S: </domain:trnData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <b-dn:trnData
S: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
S: <b-dn:bundle>
S: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example">
S: xn--fsq270a.example
S: </b-dn:rdn>
S: <b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example">
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </b-dn:bdn>
S: </b-dn:bundle>
S: </b-dn:trnData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 7: Example <transfer> Response
6.2.5. EPP <update> Command
This extension does not add any element to the EPP <update> command
described in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. However,
additional elements are defined for the <update> response in the EPP
object mapping. When the command has been processed successfully,
the EPP <extension> element shall be contained in the response if the
domain object has data associated with bundled names. Unless some
registration policy has some special processing, this EPP <extension>
element should contain the <b-dn:upData>, which contains the
<b-dn:bundle> element.
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <extension>
S: <b-dn:upData
S: xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn">
S: <b-dn:bundle>
S: <b-dn:rdn uLabel="实例.example" >
S: xn--fsq270a.example
S: </b-dn:rdn>
S: <b-dn:bdn uLabel="實例.example">
S: xn--fsqz41a.example
S: </b-dn:bdn>
S: </b-dn:bundle>
S: </b-dn:upData>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Figure 8: Example <update> Response
7. Formal Syntax
An EPP object name mapping extension for bundled names is specified
in XML Schema notation. The formal syntax presented here is a
complete schema representation of the object mapping suitable for
automated validation of EPP XML instances. The BEGIN and END tags
are not part of the schema; they are used to note the beginning and
ending of the schema for URI registration purposes.
<CODE BEGINS>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn"
xmlns:b-dn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn"
xmlns:eppcom="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
elementFormDefault="qualified">
<!--
Import common element types.
-->
<import namespace="urn:iana:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"/>
<annotation>
<documentation>
Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0
Bundle Domain Extension Schema v1.0
</documentation>
</annotation>
<!--
Child elements found in EPP commands.
-->
<element name="create" type="b-dn:createDataType"/>
<!--
Child elements of the <b-dn:create> command.
All elements must be present at time of creation
-->
<complexType name="createDataType">
<sequence>
<element name="rdn" type="b-dn:rdnType"
minOccurs="0"/>
</sequence>
</complexType>
<!--
Child response elements in <b-dn:infData>, <b-dn:delData>,
<b-dn:creData>, <b-dn:renData>, <b-dn:trnData> and <b-dn:upData>.
-->
<element name="infData" type="b-dn:bundleDataType"/>
<element name="delData" type="b-dn:bundleDataType"/>
<element name="creData" type="b-dn:bundleDataType"/>
<element name="renData" type="b-dn:bundleDataType"/>
<element name="trnData" type="b-dn:bundleDataType"/>
<element name="upData" type="b-dn:bundleDataType"/>
<complexType name="bundleDataType">
<sequence>
<element name="bundle" type="b-dn:bundleType" />
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="bundleType">
<sequence>
<element name="rdn" type="b-dn:rdnType" />
<element name="bdn" type="b-dn:rdnType"
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</sequence>
</complexType>
<complexType name="rdnType">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="eppcom:labelType">
<attribute name="uLabel" type="eppcom:labelType"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<!--
End of schema.
-->
</schema>
<CODE ENDS>
8. Internationalization Considerations
EPP is represented in XML, which provides support for encoding
information using the Unicode character set and its more compact
representations, including UTF-8. Conformant XML processors
recognize both UTF-8 and UTF-16. Though XML includes provisions to
identify and use other character encodings through use of an
"encoding" attribute in an <?xml?> declaration, use of UTF-8 is
recommended.
As an extension of the EPP domain name mapping, the elements and
element content described in this document must inherit the
internationalization conventions used to represent higher-layer
domain and core protocol structures present in an XML instance that
includes this extension.
9. IANA Considerations
9.1. XML Namespace and XML Schema
This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas
conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688].
9.1.1. BDN Namespace
IANA has assigned the following for the BDN namespace in the "ns"
subregistry of the "IETF XML Registry", with this document as the
reference:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp:b-dn
Registrant Contact: See the "Authors' Addresses" section of this
document.
XML: None. The namespace URI does not represent an XML
specification.
9.1.2. BDN XML Schema
IANA has made the following assignment in the "schema" subregistry of
the "IETF XML Registry" for the BDN XML schema, with this document as
the reference:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:epp:b-dn
Registrant Contact: See the "Authors' Addresses" section of this
document.
XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document.
9.2. EPP Extension
IANA has registered the EPP extension described in this document in
the "Extensions for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)"
registry described in [RFC7451]. The details of the registration are
as follows:
Name of Extension: "Domain Name Mapping Extension for Strict
Bundling Registration"
Document Status: Informational
Reference: This document
Registrant Name and Email Address: See the "Authors' Addresses"
section of this document.
TLDs: Any
IPR Disclosure: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2479
Status: Active
Notes: None
10. Security Considerations
Normally, the EPP server will only be connected by the authorized EPP
client, which knows whether the EPP server supports the extension
described in this document via out-of-band service. The EPP client
should avoid sending this extension to the unimplemented EPP server.
In case a client that supports this document sends a request to a
server that does not support this document, the server will return
the result code 2103 according to Section 3 of [RFC5730]. Section 3
of [RFC5730] has the following information for result code 2103.
| 2103 "Unimplemented extension"
|
| This response code MUST be returned when a server receives a valid
| EPP command element that contains a protocol command extension
| that is not implemented by the server.
Some registries and registrars have more than 15 years' experience
with the bundled registration of domain names (especially Chinese
Domain Names). They have not found any significant security issues.
One principle that the registry and registrar should let the
registrants know is that bundled registered domain names will be
created, transferred, updated, and deleted together as a group. The
registrants for bundled domain names should remember this principle
when performing operations to these domain names. [RFC5730] also
introduces some security consideration.
This document does not take a position regarding whether or not the
bundled domain names share a key for Delegation Signer (DS) and/or
DNS Public Key (DNSKEY) resource records. The DNS administrator can
choose whether DS/DNSKEY information can be shared or not. If a DS/
DNSKEY key is shared, then the bundled domain names share fate if
there is a key compromise.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.
[RFC5731] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5731>.
[RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.
[RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in
Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5891>.
[RFC5892] Faltstrom, P., Ed., "The Unicode Code Points and
Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 5892, DOI 10.17487/RFC5892, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5892>.
[RFC7451] Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for the Extensible
Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451,
February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>.
[W3C.REC-xml-20040204]
Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Maler, E.,
and F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0
(Third Edition)", W3C Recommendation REC-xml-20040204,
February 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204>.
[W3C.REC-xmlschema-1-20041028]
Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., and N. Mendelsohn,
"XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition", W3C
Recommendation REC-xmlschema-1-20041028, October 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028>.
[W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028]
Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
Second Edition", W3C Recommendation REC-xmlschema-
2-20041028, October 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028>.
11.2. Informative References
[RFC3743] Konishi, K., Huang, K., Qian, H., and Y. Ko, "Joint
Engineering Team (JET) Guidelines for Internationalized
Domain Names (IDN) Registration and Administration for
Chinese, Japanese, and Korean", RFC 3743,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3743, April 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3743>.
[RFC3915] Hollenbeck, S., "Domain Registry Grace Period Mapping for
the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", RFC 3915,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3915, September 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3915>.
[RFC4290] Klensin, J., "Suggested Practices for Registration of
Internationalized Domain Names (IDN)", RFC 4290,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4290, December 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4290>.
Acknowledgements
The authors especially thank the authors of [RFC5730] and [RFC5731]
and the following members of the China Internet Network Information
Center (CNNIC): Weiping Yang, Chao Qi.
Useful comments were made by John Klensin, Scott Hollenbeck, Patrick
Mevzek, Edward Lewis, Wil Tan, and Adrian Farrel.
Authors' Addresses
Jiankang Yao
CNNIC
4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District
Beijing
Beijing, 100190
China
Phone: +86 10 5881 3007
Email: yaojk@cnnic.cn
Linlin Zhou
CNNIC
4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District
Beijing
Beijing, 100190
China
Phone: +86 10 5881 2677
Email: zhoulinlin@cnnic.cn
Hongtao Li
CNNIC
4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District
Beijing
Beijing, 100190
China
Email: lihongtao@cnnic.cn
Ning Kong
Consultant
Email: ietfing@gmail.com
Jiagui Xie
Email: jiagui1984@163.com