Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. GouldInternet-DraftRequest for Comments: 8334 VeriSign, Inc.Intended status:Category: Standards Track W. TanExpires: June 15, 2018ISSN: 2070-1721 Cloud Registry G. Brown CentralNic LtdDecember 12, 2017February 2018 Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)draft-ietf-regext-launchphase-07Abstract This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extension mapping for the provisioning and management of domain name registrations and applications during the launch of a domain name registry. Status of This Memo ThisInternet-Draftissubmitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documentsan Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The listIt represents the consensus ofcurrent Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents validthe IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved fora maximumpublication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status ofsix monthsthis document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may beupdated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documentsobtained atany time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on June 15, 2018.https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8334. Copyright Notice Copyright (c)20172018 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(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)(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. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .43 2. Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 2.1. Application Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 2.2. Validator Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3. Launch Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 2.3.1. Trademark Claims Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 2.4. Status Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.4.1. State Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.5. Poll Messaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.6. Mark Validation Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.6.1. <launch:codeMark>elementElement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.6.2. <mark:mark>elementElement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.6.3. Digital Signature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.6.3.1. <smd:signedMark>elementElement . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.6.3.2. <smd:encodedSignedMark>elementElement . . . . . . . . . 17 3. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1718 3.1. EPP <check> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1.1. Claims Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.1.2. Availability Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3.1.3. Trademark Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3.2. EPP <info> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.3. EPP <create> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.3.1. Sunrise Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.3.2. Claims Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 3.3.3. General Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.3.4. Mixed Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3.3.5. Create Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3.4. EPP <update> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.5. EPP <delete> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.6. EPP <renew> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4546 3.7. EPP <transfer> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4.1. Launch Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.1. XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.2. EPP Extension Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5455 6.Implementation Status .Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556.1. Verisign EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7. References . . . . .55 6.2. Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) SRS. . . .56 6.3. Verisign .COM / .NET SRS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566.4. REngin v3.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6.5. RegistryEngine EPP Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6.6. Neustar EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7.1. Normative References .58 6.7. gTLD Shared Registry System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 7. Security Considerations. . 56 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 8.56 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 9.1. Normative References. . 57 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 9.2. Informative References. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 60 Appendix A. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 A.2. Change from 0157 1. Introduction This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730]. This EPP mapping specifies a flexible schema that can be used to02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 A.3. Change from 02implement several common use cases related to03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 A.4. Change from 03the provisioning and management of domain name registrations and applications during the launch of a domain name registry. It is typical for domain registries to04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 A.5. Change from 04operate in special modes as they begin operation to05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 A.6. Change from 05facilitate allocation of domain names, often according to06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 A.7. Change from 06special rules. This document uses the term "launch phase" and the shorter form "launch" to07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 A.8. Change from 07refer to08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 A.9. Change from 08such a period. Multiple launch phases and multiple models are supported to09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 A.10. Changeenable the launch of a domain name registry. Server policy determines what is supported and validated. Communication of the server policy is typically performed using an out-of-band mechanism that is not specified in this document. The EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] is designed for the steady- state operation of a registry. During a launch period, the model in place may be different from09what is defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. For example, registries often accept multiple applications for the same domain name during the "sunrise" launch phase, referred to10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 A.11. Change from 10as a Launch Application. A Launch Registration refers to11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 A.12. Change from 11a registration made during a launch phase when the server uses a "first-come, first-served" model. Even in a "first-come, first-served" model, additional steps and information might be required, such as trademark information. In addition, RFC 7848 [RFC7848] defines a registry interface for the Trademark Claims or "claims" launch phase that includes support for presenting a Trademark Claims Notice to12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 A.13. Change from 12 to EPPEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 A.14. Change EPPEXT 00 to EPPEXT 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 A.15. Change EPPEXT 01 to EPPEXT 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 A.16. Change EPPEXT 02 to EPPEXT 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 A.17. Change EPPEXT 03the registrant. This document proposes an extension toEPPEXT 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 A.18. Change EPPEXT 04the domain name mapping in order toEPPEXT 05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 A.19. Change EPPEXT 05provide a uniform interface for the management of Launch Applications and Launch Registrations in launch phases. 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are toEPPEXT 06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 A.20. Change EPPEXT 06be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. XML [W3C.REC-xml11-20060816] is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications and examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in the character case presented in order toEPPEXT 07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 A.21. Change from EPPEXT 07develop a conforming implementation. In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and whitespace in examples are provided only toREGEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . 66 A.22. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 . . . . . . . . . . . 66 A.23. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 . . . . . . . . . . . 66 A.24. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 . . . . . . . . . . . 66 A.25. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 . . . . . . . . . . . 66 A.26. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 . . . . . . . . . . . 66 A.27. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 . . . . . . . . . . . 67 A.28. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07 . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 1. Introduction This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730]. This EPP mapping specifiesillustrate element relationships and are not aflexible schema that can be used to implement several commonREQUIRED feature of this protocol. The usecases related to the provisioning and managementof "..." is used as shorthand for elements defined outside this document. A Launch Registration is a domain nameregistrations and applicationsregistration duringthea launchofphase when the server uses adomain name registry. It is typical"first-come, first-served" model. Only a single registration for a domainregistries to operatename can exist inspecial modes as they begin operation to facilitate allocation of domain names, often according to special rules. This document usestheterm "launch phase" andserver at a time. A Launch Application represents theshorter form "launch" to referintent tosuchregister a domain name during aperiod. Multiplelaunchphases andphase when the server accepts multiplemodels are supported to enableapplications for a domain name, and thelaunchserver later selects one of the applications to allocate as a registration. Many Launch Applications for a domain nameregistry. Whatcan exist in the server at a time. The XML namespace prefix "launch" issupportedused for the namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0", but implementations MUST NOT depend on it andwhat is validated is upinstead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser and serializer toserver policy. Communication ofinterpret and output theserver policy is typically performed using an out-of-band mechanism that is not specified in this document.XML documents. TheEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]XML namespace prefix "smd" isdesignedused for thesteady- state operation of a registry. Duringnamespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0" [RFC7848], but implementations MUST NOT depend on it and instead employ alaunch period,proper namespace-aware XML parser and serializer to interpret and output themodel in place may be different from whatXML documents. The XML namespace prefix "mark" isdefined inused for the namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0" [RFC7848], but implementations MUST NOT depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser and serializer to interpret and output the XML documents. 2. Object Attributes This extension adds additional elements to the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731].For example, registries often acceptOnly those new elements are described here. 2.1. Application Identifier Servers MAY allow multipleapplications for the same domain name during the "Sunrise" launch phase,applications, referred to as a LaunchApplication. A Launch Registration refers to a registration madeApplication, of the same domain name duringaits launch phasewhen the server usesoperations. Upon receiving a"first-come, first-served" model. Even in a "first-come, first-served" model, additional steps and information might be required, such as trademark information. In addition, RFC 7848 [RFC7848] definesvalid <domain:create> command to create aregistry interface forLaunch Application, theTrademark Claims or "claims" launch phase that includes support for presenting a Trademark Claims Noticeserver MUST create an application object corresponding to theRegistrant. This document proposesrequest, assign anextensionapplication identifier for the Launch Application, set the pendingCreate status [RFC5731], and return the application identifier to thedomain name mapping inclient with the <launch:applicationID> element. In order toprovide a uniform interface forfacilitate correlation, all subsequent launch operations on themanagement ofLaunchApplications and Launch Registrations in launch phases. 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications and examples provided in this documentApplication MUST beinterpreted inqualified by thecharacter case presented in orderpreviously assigned application identifier using the <launch:applicationID> element. 2.2. Validator Identifier The Validator Identifier is unique todevelop a conforming implementation. In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol clientthe server and"S:" represents lines returned byis the identifier for aprotocol server. Indentation and white space in examples are provided only to illustrate element relationshipsTrademark Validator, which validates marks andare nothas aREQUIRED featurerepository ofthis protocol.validated marks. Theuse of "..."OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is usedas shorthand for elements defined outside this document. A Launch Registration is a domain name registration during a launch phase when the server uses a "first-come, first-served" model. Only a single registration for a domain name can exist in the server at a time. A Launch Application represents the intenttoregister a domain name during a launch phase whendefine theserver accepts multiple applications for a domain name andValidator Identifier of theserver later selectsTrademark Validator. Registries MAY support more than one third-party Trademark Validator. The unique set of Validator Identifier values supported by theapplicationsserver is up toallocate as a registration. Many Launch Applications for a domain name can exist in theserverat a time.policy. TheXML namespace prefix "launch" is usedInternet Corporation forthe namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0", but implementations MUST NOT depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser and serializer to interpretAssigned Names andoutputNumbers (ICANN) Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) is theXML documents. The XML namespace prefix "smd"default Trademark Validator and isusedreserved for the[RFC7848] namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0", but implementations MUST NOT depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser and serializer to interpret and outputValidator Identifier of "tmch". If theXML documents. The XML namespace prefix "mark"ICANN TMCH is not usedforor multiple Trademark Validators are used, the[RFC7848] namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0", but implementationsValidator Identifier MUSTNOT depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML parser and serializer to interpret and outputbe defined using theXML documents. 2. Object Attributes This extension adds additional elements"validatorID" attribute. The Validator Identifier MAY be related tothe EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. Only those new elements are described here. 2.1. Application Identifier Servers MAY allow multiple applications, referred to as a Launch Application, of the same domain name during its launch phase operations. Upon receiving a valid <domain:create> command to create a Launch Application, the server MUST create an application object corresponding to the request, assign an application identifier for the Launch Application, set the [RFC5731] pendingCreate status, and return the application identifier to the client with the <launch:applicationID> element. In order to facilitate correlation, all subsequent launch operations on the Launch Application MUST be qualified by the previously assigned application identifier using the <launch:applicationID> element. 2.2. Validator Identifier The Validator Identifier is the identifier unique to the server, for a Trademark Validator that validates marks and has a repository of validated marks. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is used to define the Validator Identifier of the Trademark Validator. Registries MAY support more than one Third Party Trademark Validator. The unique set of Validator Identifier values supported by the server is up to server policy. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) is the default Trademark Validator and is reserved the Validator Identifier of "tmch". If the ICANN TMCH is not used or multiple Trademark Validators are used, the Validator Identifier MUST be defined using the "validatorID" attribute. The Validator Identifier MAY be related to one or more issuer identifiers ofone or more issuer identifiers of the <mark:id>elementandthe<smd:id>elementelements defined in [RFC7848]. Both the Validator Identifier and the Issuer Identifier used MUST be unique in the server. If the ICANN TMCH is not used or multiple Trademark Validators are used, the server MUST define the list of supported validator identifiers and MUST make this information available to clients using a mutually acceptable, out-of- band mechanism. The Validator Identifier may define a non-Trademark Validator that supports a form of claims, where claims and a Validator Identifier can be used for purposes beyond trademarks. 2.3. Launch Phases The server MAY support multiple launch phases sequentially or simultaneously. The <launch:phase> element MUST be included by the client to define the target launch phase of the command. The server SHOULD validate the phase and MAY validate the sub-phase of the <launch:phase> element against the active phase and OPTIONAL sub- phase of the server, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if there is a mismatch. The following launch phase values are defined: sunrise: The phase during which trademark holders can submit registrations or applications with trademark information that can be validated by the server. landrush: Apost-Sunrisepost-"sunrise" launch phase when non-trademark holders are allowed to register domain names with steps taken to address a large volume of initial registrations. claims: The phase, as defined intheSection 2.3.1, in which aClaims Noticeclaims notice must be displayed to a prospective registrant of a domain name that matches trademarks. open: A phase that is also referred to as "steady state". Servers may require additional trademark protection during this phase. custom: A custom server launch phase that is defined using the "name" attribute. For extensibility, the <launch:phase> element includes an OPTIONAL "name" attribute that can define asub-phase,sub-phase or the full name of the phase when the <launch:phase> element has the "custom" value. For example, the "claims" launch phase could have two sub-phases that include "landrush" and "open". Launch phases MAY overlap to support the "claims" launch phase, defined intheSection 2.3.1, and to support a traditional "landrush" launch phase. The overlap of the "claims" and "landrush" launch phases SHOULD be handled by setting "claims" as the <launch:phase> value and setting "landrush" as the sub-phase with the "name" attribute. For example, the <launch:phase> element should be <launch:phase name="landrush">claims</launch:phase>. 2.3.1. Trademark Claims Phase The Trademark Claims Phase is when aClaims Noticeclaims notice must be displayed to a prospective registrant of a domain name that matches trademarks. See[I-D.ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec][ICANN-TMCH] for additional details of trademark claims handling. The source of the trademarks is a TrademarkValidatorValidator, and the source of theClaims Noticeclaims notice information is aClaimClaims Notice Information Service (CNIS), which may be directly linked to a Trademark Validator. The client interfaces with 1) the server to determine if a trademark exists for a domain name,interfaces with2) a CNIS to get theClaims Noticeclaims notice information, andinterfaces with3) the server to pass theClaims Noticeclaims notice acceptance information in a create command. This document supports the Trademark Claims Phase in twowaysways, including: Claims Check Form: Is defined in Section 3.1.1 and is used to determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks for a domain name. If there is at least one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a claims key is returned. The mapping of domain names and the claims keys is based on an out-of-band interface between the server and the Trademark Validator. The CNIS associated with the claims key Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) MUST accept the claims key as the basis for retrieving the claims information. Claims Create Form: Is defined in Section 3.3.2 and is used to pass theClaims Noticeclaims notice acceptance information in a create command. The notice identifier (<launch:noticeID>) format, validation rules, and server processing is up to the interface between the server and the Trademark Validator. The CNIS associated with the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) MUST generate a notice identifier compliant with the <launch:noticeID> element. The following shows the Trademark Claims Phase registration flow: .------------. .--------. .--------. .------. | Registrant | | Client | | Server | | CNIS | '------------' '--------' '--------' '------' | Request Domain | | | | Registration | | | |--------------->| Domain Check | | | |--------------------------->| | | Domain | Domain Unavailable .------------. | | Unavailable |<---------------------( Available? ) | |<---------------| No '------------' | | | Domain Available | Yes | | |<---------------------------| | | | Domain Claims Check | | | |--------------------------->| | | | .---------. | | | Claims Don't Exist / Does \ | | |<--------------------( Domain have ) | | | No \ Claims? / | | | '---------' | | | Domain Create | | Yes | | |--------------------------->| | | | Domain | Domain Registered | | | | Registered |<---------------------------| | | |<---------------| | | | | | | | Claims Exist with Claims Keys | | | |<------------------------------' | | | | .-----. | | Request Claims Info with Claims Key | |Abort| | Display |-------------------------------------->| '-----' | Claims | Return Claims Info | ^ | Notice |<--------------------------------------| | No |<---------------| | | .------. Yes | | '-( Ack? )----------->| Domain Claims Create Form | | '------' |--------------------------->| | | Registration | Error .----------------------. | | Error |<-----------( Validation Successful? ) | |<---------------| No '----------------------' | | | | Yes | | Domain | Domain Registered | | | Registered |<---------------------------| | |<---------------| | | Figure 1 2.4. Status Values ALaunch Application or Launch Registration object MAY have a launch status value. The <launch:status> element is used to convey the launch status pertaining to the object, beyond what is specified in the object mapping. A Launch Application or Launch Registration MUST set the [RFC5731] "pendingCreate" status if a launch status is supported and the launch status is not one of the final statuses ("allocated" and "rejected"). The following status values are defined using the required "s" attribute: pendingValidation: The initial state of a newly-created application or registration object. The application or registration requires validation, but the validation process has not yet completed. validated: The application or registration meets relevant registry rules. invalid: The application or registration does not validate according to registry rules. Server policies permitting, it may transition back into "pendingValidation" for revalidation, after modifications are made to ostensibly correct attributes that caused the validation failure. pendingAllocation: The allocation of the application or registration is pending based on the results of some out-of-band process (for example, an auction). allocated: The object corresponding to the application or registration has been provisioned. This is a possible end state of an application or registration object. rejected: The application or registration object was not provisioned. This is a possible end state of an application or registration object. custom: A custom status that is defined using the "name" attribute. Each status value MAY be accompanied by a string of human-readable text that describes the rationale for the status applied to the object. The OPTIONAL "lang" attribute, as defined in [RFC5646], MAY be present to identify the language if the negotiated value is something other than the default value of "en" (English). For extensibility the <launch:status> element includes an OPTIONAL "name" attribute that can define a sub-status or the full name of the status when the status value is "custom". The server SHOULD use one of the non-"custom" status values. Status values MAY be skipped. For example, an application or registration MAY immediately start at the "allocated" status or an application or registration MAY skip the "pendingAllocation" status. If the launch phase does not require validation of a request, an application or registration MAY immediately skip to "pendingAllocation". 2.4.1. State Transition The transitions between the states is a matter of server policy. This diagram defines one possible set of permitted transitions. | request | | +--------------------------+ | | | v v | +-------------------+ | | | | | pendingValidation +--------------+ | | | | | +---------+---------+ | | | | | | | | v v | +-----------+ +---------+ | | | | | | | validated | | invalid +--+ | | | | +-----+-----+ +----+----+ | | | | v | +-------------------+ | | | | | pendingAllocation +-----------+ | | | | | +---------+---------+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | v v v +---------+ +--------+ / \ / \ | allocated | | rejected | \ / \ / +---------+ +--------+ Figure 2 2.5. Poll Messaging A Launch Application MUST be handled as an EPP domain name object as specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with the "pendingCreate" status and with the launch status values defined in Section 2.4. A Launch Registration MUST be handled as an EPP domain name object as specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with the "pendingCreate" status and with the launch status values defined in Section 2.4 As a Launch Application or Launch Registration transitions between the status values defined in Section 2.4, the server SHOULD insert poll messages, per [RFC5730], for the applicable intermediate statuses, including the "pendingValidation", "validated", "pendingAllocation, and "invalid" statuses, using the <domain:infData> element with the <launch:infData> extension. The <domain:infData> element MAY contain non-mandatory information, like contact and name server information. Also, further extensions that would normally be included in the response of a <domain:info> command, per [RFC5731], MAY be included. For the final statuses, including the "allocated" and "rejected" statuses, the server MUST insert a <domain:panData> poll message, per [RFC5731], with the <launch:infData> extension. The following is an example poll message for a Launch Application that has transitioned to the "pendingAllocation" state. 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="1301"> S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg> S: </result> S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345"> S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate> S: <msg>Application pendingAllocation.</msg> S: </msgQ> S: <resData> S: <domain:infData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> S: ... S: </domain:infData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> S: <launch:status s="pendingAllocation"/> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an "allocated" Launch Application. 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="1301"> S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg> S: </result> S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345"> S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate> S: <msg>Application successfully allocated.</msg> S: </msgQ> S: <resData> S: <domain:panData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:paTRID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </domain:paTRID> S: <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate> S: </domain:panData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> S: <launch:status s="allocated"/> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID> S: <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an "allocated" Launch Registration. 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="1301"> S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg> S: </result> S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345"> S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate> S: <msg>Registration successfully allocated.</msg> S: </msgQ> S: <resData> S: <domain:panData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:paTRID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </domain:paTRID> S: <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate> S: </domain:panData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:status s="allocated"/> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID> S: <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 2.6. Mark Validation Models A server MUST support at least one of the following models for validating trademark information: code: Use of a mark code by itself to validate that the mark matches the domain name. This model is supported using the <launch:codeMark> element with just the <launch:code> element. mark: The mark information is passed without any other validation element. The server will use some custom form of validation to validate that the mark information is authentic. This model is supported using the <launch:codeMark> element with just the <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element. code with mark: A code is used along with the mark information by the server to validate the mark utilizing an external party. The code represents some form of secret that matches the mark information passed. This model is supported using the <launch:codeMark> element that contains both the <launch:code> and the <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements. signed mark: The mark information is digitally signed as described in the Digital Signature (Section 2.6.3) section. The digital signature can be directly validated by the server using the public key of the external party that created the signed mark using its private key. This model is supported using the <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) and <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) elements. More than one <launch:codeMark>, <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1), or <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) element MAY be specified. The maximum number of marks per domain name is up to server policy. 2.6.1. <launch:codeMark> element The <launch:codeMark> element is used by the "code", "mark", and "code with mark" validation models, has the following child elements: <launch:code>: OPTIONAL mark code used to validate the <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) information. The mark code is be a mark-specific secret that the server can verify against a third party. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator that the code originated from, with no default value. <mark:mark>: OPTIONAL mark information with child elements defined in the Mark (Section 2.6.2) section. The following is an example <launch:codeMark> element with both a <launch:code> and <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element. <launch:codeMark> <launch:code validatorID="sample"> 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code> <mark:mark xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> ... </mark:mark> </launch:codeMark> 2.6.2. <mark:mark> element A <mark:mark> element describes an applicant's prior right to a given domain name that is used with the "mark", "mark with code", and the "signed mark" validation models. The <mark:mark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new mark format can be supported by creating a new XML schema for the mark that has an element that substitutes for the <mark:abstractMark> element from [RFC7848]. 2.6.3. Digital Signature Digital signatures MAY be used by the server to validate the mark information, when using the "signed mark" validation model with the <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) element and the <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) element. When using digital signatures the server MUST validate the digital signature. 2.6.3.1. <smd:signedMark> element The <smd:signedMark> element contains the digitally signed mark information. The <smd:signedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML schema for the signed mark that has an element that substitutes for the <smd:abstractSignedMark> element from [RFC7848]. 2.6.3.2. <smd:encodedSignedMark> element The <smd:encodedSignedMark> element contains an encoded form of the digitally signed <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) element. The <smd:encodedSignedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new encoded signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML schema for the encoded signed mark that has an element that substitutes for the <smd:encodedSignedMark> element from [RFC7848]. 3. 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 the Launch Phase Extension. This mapping is designed to be flexible, requiring only a minimum set of required elements. While it is meant to serve several use cases, it does not prescribe any interpretation by the client or server. Such processing is typically highly policy-dependent and therefore specific to implementations. Operations on application objects are done via one or more of the existing EPP verbs defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. Registries MAY choose to support a subset of the operations. 3.1. EPP <check> Command There are three forms of the extension to the EPP <check> command: the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), the Availability Check Form (Section 3.1.2), and the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3). The <launch:check> element "type" attribute defines the form, with the value of "claims" for the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), with the value of "avail" for the Availability Check Form (Section 3.1.2), and with the value of "trademark" for the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3). The default value of the "type" attribute is "claims". The forms supported by the server is determined by server policy. The server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2307 if it receives a check form that is not supported. 3.1.1. Claims Check Form The Claims Check Form defines a new command called the Claims Check Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks, in the specified launch phase, for each domain name passed in the command, that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. The availability check information defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] MUST NOT be returned for the Claims Check Command. This form is the default form and MAY be explicitly identified by setting the <launch:check> "type" attribute to "claims". Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the Claims Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching trademark exists for the domain name, that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. If there is at least one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a <launch:claimKey> element is returned. The client MAY then use the value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain information needed to generate the Trademark Claims Notice from Trademark Validator based on the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2). The unique notice identifier of the Trademark Claims Notice MUST be passed in the <launch:noticeID> element of the extension to the Create Command (Section 3.3). The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check for matching trademarks. The <launch:check> element contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: Contains the value of the active launch phase of the server. The server SHOULD validate the value according to Section 2.3. Example Claims Check command using the <check> domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" explicitly set to "claims", to determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example", and "domain3.example" require claims notices during the "claims" launch phase: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <check> C: <domain:check C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name> C: </domain:check> C: </check> C: <extension> C: <launch:check C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="claims"> C: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase> C: </launch:check> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP <response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that identifies the launch namespace. The <launch:chkData> element contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase that mirrors the <launch:phase> element included in the <launch:check>. <launch:cd>: One or more <launch:cd> elements that contain the following child elements: <launch:name>: Contains the fully qualified name of the queried domain name. This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the domain name that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. A value of "1" (or "true") means that a matching trademark does exist and that the "Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. A value of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not exist or that the "Claims Create Form" is NOT required on a Domain Create Command. <launch:claimKey>: Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) for querying the information needed to generate a Trademark Claims Notice. The <launch:claimKey> is used as the key for the query in place of the domain name to securely query the service without using a well-known value like a domain name. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator to query for the Claims Notice information, with the default being the ICANN TMCH. The "validatorID" attribute MAY reference a non-trademark claims clearinghouse identifier to support other forms of claims notices. Example Claims Check response when a claims notice is not required for the domain name domain1.example, a claims notice is required for the domain name domain2.example in the "tmch", and a claims notice is required for the domain name domain3.example in the "tmch" and "custom-tmch", for the "claims" launch phase: 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: <launch:chkData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch"> S: 20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: </launch:chkData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.1.2. Availability Check Form The Availability Check Form defines additional elements to extend the EPP <check> command described in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. No additional elements are defined for the EPP <check> response. This form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check> "type" attribute to "avail". The EPP <check> command is used to determine if an object can be provisioned within a repository. Domain names may be made available only in unique launch phases, whilst remaining unavailable for concurrent launch phases. In addition to the elements expressed in the <domain:check>, the command is extended with the <launch:check> element that contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: The launch phase to which domain name availability should be determined. The server SHOULD validate the value and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if it is invalid. Example Availability Check Form command using the <check> domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set to "avail", to determine the availability of two domain names in the "idn-release" custom launch phase: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <check> C: <domain:check C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name> C: </domain:check> C: </check> C: <extension> C: <launch:check C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="avail"> C: <launch:phase name="idn-release">custom</launch:phase> C: </launch:check> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The Availability Check Form does not define any extension to the response of an <check> domain command. After processing the command, the server replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.1.3. Trademark Check Form The Trademark Check Form defines a new command called the Trademark Check Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks for each domain name passed in the command, independent of the active launch phase of the server and whether the "Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. The availability check information defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] MUST NOT be returned for the Trademark Check Command. This form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check> "type" attribute to "trademark". Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the Trademark Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching trademark exists for the domain name. If there is at least one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a <launch:claimKey> element is returned. The client MAY then use the value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain Trademark Claims Notice information from Trademark Validator based on the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2). The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check for matching trademarks. The <launch:check> element does not contain any child elements with the "Trademark Check Form": Example Trademark Check command using the <check> domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set to "trademark", to determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example", and "domain3.example" have any matching trademarks: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <check> C: <domain:check C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name> C: </domain:check> C: </check> C: <extension> C: <launch:check C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="trademark"/> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP <response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that identifies the launch namespace. The <launch:chkData> element contains the following child elements: <launch:cd>: One or more <launch:cd> elements that contain the following child elements: <launch:name>: Contains the fully qualified name of the queried domain name. This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the domain name. A value of "1" (or "true") means that a matching trademark does exist. A value of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not exist. <launch:claimKey>: Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) for querying the information needed to generate a Trademark Claims Notice. The <launch:claimKey> is used as the key for the query in place of the domain name to securely query the service without using a well-known value like a domain name. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator to query for the Claims Notice information, with the default being the ICANN TMCH. The "validatorID" attribute MAY reference a non-trademark claims clearinghouse identifier to support other forms of claims notices. Example Trademark Check response when no matching trademarks are found for the domain name domain1.example, matching trademarks are found for the domain name domain2.example in the "tmch", matching trademarks are found for domain name domain3.example in the "tmch" and "custom-tmch", for the "claims" launch phase: 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: <launch:chkData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch"> S: 20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: </launch:chkData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.2. EPP <info> Command This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <info> command and response to be used in conjunction with the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. The EPP <info> command is used to retrieve information for a launch phase registration or application. The Application Identifier (Section 2.1) returned in the <launch:creData> element of the create response (Section 3.3) can be used for retrieving information for a Launch Application. A <launch:info> element is sent along with the regular <info> domain command. The <launch:info> element includes an OPTIONAL "includeMark" boolean attribute, with a default value of "false", to indicate whether or not to include the mark in the response. The <launch:info> element contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase during which the application or registration was submitted or is associated with. Server policy defines the phases that are supported. The server SHOULD validate the value and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if it is invalid. <launch:applicationID>: OPTIONAL application identifier of the Launch Application. Example <info> domain command with the <launch:info> extension to retrieve information for the sunrise application for domain.example and application identifier "abc123": C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <info> C: <domain:info C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: </domain:info> C: </info> C: <extension> C: <launch:info C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: includeMark="true"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> C: </launch:info> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> Example <info> domain command with the <launch:info> extension to retrieve information for the sunrise registration for domain.example: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <info> C: <domain:info C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: </domain:info> C: </info> C: <extension> C: <launch:info C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: </launch:info> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> If the query was successful, the server replies with a <launch:infData> element along with the regular EPP <resData>. The <launch:infData> contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase during which the application was submitted, or is associated with, that matches the associated <info> command <launch:phase>. <launch:applicationID>: OPTIONAL Application Identifier of the Launch Application. <launch:status>: OPTIONAL status of the Launch Application using one of the supported status values (Section 2.4). <mark:mark>: Zero or more <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements only if the "includeMark" attribute is "true" in the command. Example <info> domain response using the <launch:infData> extension with the mark information: 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>domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:roid>EXAMPLE1-REP</domain:roid> S: <domain:status s="pendingCreate"/> S: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> S: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> S: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> S: <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID> S: <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID> S: <domain:crDate>2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate> S: <domain:authInfo> S: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> S: </domain:authInfo> S: </domain:infData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> S: <launch:status s="pendingValidation"/> S: <mark:mark S: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> S: ... S: </mark:mark> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.3. EPP <create> Command There are four forms of the extension to the EPP <create> command that include the Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1), the Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2), the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3), and the Mixed Create Form (Section 3.3.4). The form is dependent on the supported launch phases (Section 2.3) as defined below. sunrise: The EPP <create> command with the "sunrise" launch phase is used to submit a registration with trademark information that can be verified by the server with the <domain:name> value. The Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) is used for the "sunrise" launch phase. landrush: The EPP <create> command with the "landrush" launch phase MAY use the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3) to explicitly specify the phase and optionally define the expected type of object to create. claims: The EPP <create> command with the "claims" launch phase is used to pass the information associated with the presentation and acceptance of the Claims Notice. The Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) is used and the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3) MAY be used for the "claims" launch phase. open: The EPP <create> command with the "open" launch phase is undefined but the form supported is up to server policy. Use of the Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be used to pass the information associated with the presentation and acceptance of the Claims Notice if required for the domain name. custom: The EPP <create> command with the "custom" launch phase is undefined but the form supported is up to server policy. 3.3.1. Sunrise Create Form The Sunrise Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] includes the verifiable trademark information that the server uses to match against the domain name to authorize the domain create. A server MUST support one of four models in Claim Validation Models (Section 2.6) to verify the trademark information passed by the client. A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create> domain command. The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type" attribute that defines the expected type of object ("application" or "registration") to create. The server SHOULD validate the "type" attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 if the type is incorrect. The <launch:create> element contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: The identifier for the launch phase. The server SHOULD validate the value according to Section 2.3. <launch:codeMark> or <smd:signedMark> or <smd:encodedSignedMark>: <launch:codeMark>: Zero or more <launch:codeMark> elements. The <launch:codeMark> child elements are defined in the <launch:codeMark> element (Section 2.6.1) section. <smd:signedMark>: Zero or more <smd:signedMark> elements. The <smd:signedMark> child elements are defined in the <smd:signedMark> element (Section 2.6.3.1) section. <smd:encodedSignedMark>: Zero or more <smd:encodedSignedMark> elements. The <smd:encodedSignedMark> child elements are defined in the <smd:encodedSignedMark> element (Section 2.6.3.2) section. The following is an example <create> domain command using the <launch:create> extension, following the "code" validation model, with multiple sunrise codes: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code validatorID="sample1"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code> C: </launch:codeMark> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code>49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AD</launch:code> C: </launch:codeMark> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code validatorID="sample2"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AE</launch:code> C: </launch:codeMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp>Launch Application or Launch Registration object MAY have a launch status value. Thefollowing<launch:status> element isan example <create> domain command usingused to convey the<launch:create> extension, followinglaunch status pertaining to the"mark" validation model, withobject, beyond what is specified in themark information: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <mark:mark C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> C: ... C: </mark:mark> C: </launch:codeMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp>object mapping. A Launch Application or Launch Registration MUST set the "pendingCreate" status [RFC5731] if a launch status is supported and is not one of the final statuses ("allocated" and "rejected"). The followingis an example <create> domain commandstatus values are defined using the<launch:create> extension, followingrequired "s" attribute: pendingValidation: The initial state of a newly created application or registration object. The application or registration requires validation, but the"code with mark"validationmodel, withprocess has not yet completed. validated: The application or registration meets relevant registry rules. invalid: The application or registration does not validate according to registry rules. Server policies permitting, it may transition back into "pendingValidation" for revalidation, after modifications are made to ostensibly correct attributes that caused the validation failure. pendingAllocation: The allocation of the application or registration is pending based on the results of some out-of-band process (for example, an auction). allocated: The object corresponding to the application or registration has been provisioned. This is acode and mark information: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code validatorID="sample"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code> C: <mark:mark C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> C: ... C: </mark:mark> C: </launch:codeMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp>possible end state of an application or registration object. rejected: Thefollowingapplication or registration object was not provisioned. This is a possible end state of anexample <create> domain commandapplication or registration object. custom: A custom status that is defined using the<launch:create> extension, following the "signed mark" validation model, with"name" attribute. Each status value MAY be accompanied by a string of human-readable text that describes thesigned mark informationrationale fora sunrise application: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="application"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <smd:signedMark id="signedMark" C: xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"> C: ... C: </smd:signedMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp>the status applied to the object. ThefollowingOPTIONAL "lang" attribute, as defined in [RFC5646], MAY be present to identify the language if the negotiated value isan example <create> domain command usingsomething other than the default value of "en" (English). For extensibility, the <launch:status> element includes an OPTIONAL "name" attribute that can define a sub-status or the<launch:create> extension, followingfull name of the"signed mark" validation model, withstatus when thebase64 encoded signed mark information: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <smd:encodedSignedMark C: xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"> C: ... C: </smd:encodedSignedMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.2. Claims Create Formstatus value is "custom". TheClaims Create Formserver SHOULD use one of theextensionnon-"custom" status values. Status values MAY be skipped. For example, an application or registration MAY immediately start at the "allocated" status, or an application or registration MAY skip the "pendingAllocation" status. If the launch phase does not require validation of a request, an application or registration MAY immediately skip to "pendingAllocation". 2.4.1. State Transition The transitions between the states is a matter of server policy. This diagram defines one possible set of permitted transitions. | request | | +--------------------------+ | | | v v | +-------------------+ | | | | | pendingValidation +--------------+ | | | | | +---------+---------+ | | | | | | | | v v | +-----------+ +---------+ | | | | | | | validated | | invalid +--+ | | | | +-----+-----+ +----+----+ | | | | v | +-------------------+ | | | | | pendingAllocation +-----------+ | | | | | +---------+---------+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | v v v +---------+ +--------+ / \ / \ | allocated | | rejected | \ / \ / +---------+ +--------+ Figure 2 2.5. Poll Messaging A Launch Application MUST be handled as an EPP domain namemapping [RFC5731] includes the information related to the registrant's acceptance of the Claims Notice. A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create> domain command. The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type" attribute that defines the expected type ofobject("application" or "registration") to create. The server SHOULD validate the "type" attribute, when passed, againstas specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with thetype of object that will be created,"pendingCreate" status andreturnlaunch status values defined in Section 2.4. A Launch Registration MAY be handled as an EPPerror result code of 2306 if the type is incorrect. The <launch:create> element contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: Contains the value ofdomain name object as specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with theactive"pendingCreate" status and launchphase of the server. The server SHOULD validate the value according tostatus values defined in Section2.3. <launch:notice>: One2.4. As a Launch Application ormore <launch:notice> elements that containLaunch Registration transitions between thefollowing child elements: <launch:noticeID>: Unique notice identifier forstatus values defined in Section 2.4, theClaims Notice. The <launch:noticeID> element has an OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute isserver SHOULD insert poll messages, per [RFC5730], for theValidator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator isapplicable intermediate statuses, including thesource of"pendingValidation", "validated", "pendingAllocation, and "invalid" statuses, using theclaims notice,<domain:infData> element with thedefault being<launch:infData> extension. The <domain:infData> element MAY contain non-mandatory information, like contact and name server information. Also, further extensions that would normally be included in theICANN TMCH. <launch:notAfter>: Expiryresponse of a <domain:info> command, per [RFC5731], MAY be included. For theclaims notice. <launch:acceptedDate>: Containsfinal statuses, including thedate"allocated" andtime"rejected" statuses, the server MUST insert a <domain:panData> poll message, per [RFC5731], with the <launch:infData> extension. The following is an example poll message for a Launch Application that has transitioned to theclaims notice was accepted."pendingAllocation" state. 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="1301"> S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg> S: </result> S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345"> S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate> S: <msg>Application pendingAllocation.</msg> S: </msgQ> S: <resData> S: <domain:infData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> S: ... S: </domain:infData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> S: <launch:status s="pendingAllocation"/> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an "allocated" Launch Application. 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="1301"> S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg> S: </result> S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345"> S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate> S: <msg>Application successfully allocated.</msg> S: </msgQ> S: <resData> S: <domain:panData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:paTRID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </domain:paTRID> S: <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate> S: </domain:panData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> S: <launch:status s="allocated"/> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID> S: <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> The following is an example<create> domain command using the <launch:create> extension with the <launch:notice> information for the "tmch" and the "custom-tmch" validators,<domain:panData> poll message forthe "claims" launch phase: C:<?xmlan "allocated" Launch Registration. S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>C:<eppS:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">C: <command> C: <create> C: <domain:create C:S: <response> S: <result code="1301"> S: <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg> S: </result> S: <msgQ count="5" id="12345"> S: <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate> S: <msg>Registration successfully allocated.</msg> S: </msgQ> S: <resData> S: <domain:panData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C:S: <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:paTRID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </domain:paTRID> S: <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate> S: </domain:panData> S: </resData> S: <extension>C: <launch:create C:S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">C: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase> C: <launch:notice> C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch"> C: 370d0b7c9223372036854775807</launch:noticeID> C: <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z C: </launch:notAfter> C: <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:00.0Z C: </launch:acceptedDate> C: </launch:notice> C: <launch:notice> C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="custom-tmch"> C: 470d0b7c9223654313275808</launch:noticeID> C: <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z C: </launch:notAfter> C: <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:30.0Z C: </launch:acceptedDate> C: </launch:notice> C: </launch:create> C:S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:status s="allocated"/> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension>C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.3. General Create FormS: <trID> S: <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID> S: <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 2.6. Mark Validation Models A server MUST support at least one of the following models for validating trademark information: code: Use of a mark code by itself to validate that the mark matches the domain name. This model is supported using the <launch:codeMark> element with just the <launch:code> element. mark: TheGeneral Create Formmark information is passed without any other validation element. The server will use some custom form ofthe extensionvalidation to validate that theEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] includesmark information is authentic. This model is supported using thelaunch phase and optionally<launch:codeMark> element with just theobject type to create. The OPTIONAL "type" attribute defines<mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element. code with mark: A code is used along with the mark information by theexpected type of object ("application" or "registration") to create. TheserverSHOULDto validate the"type" attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be created, and returnmark utilizing anEPP error resultexternal party. The code represents some form of2306 ifsecret that matches thetype is incorrect. A <launch:create> elementmark information passed. This model issent along withsupported using theregular <create> domain command. The <launch:create><launch:codeMark> element that contains both thefollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: Contains the value of the active launch phase of<launch:code> and theserver.<mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements. signed mark: Theserver SHOULD validatemark information is digitally signed as described in thevalue according to Section 2.3.Digital Signature section (Section 2.6.3). Thefollowing is an example <create> domain commanddigital signature can be directly validated by the server using the<launch:create> extension for a "landrush" launch phase application: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="application"> C: <launch:phase>landrush</launch:phase> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.4. Mixed Create Form The Mixed Create Form supports a mixpublic key of thecreate forms, where for exampleexternal party that created theSunrise Create Formsigned mark using its private key. This model is supported using the <smd:signedMark> (Section3.3.1)2.6.3.1) andthe Claims Create Form<smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section3.3.2)2.6.3.2) elements. More than one <launch:codeMark>, <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1), or <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) element MAY besupported in a single commandspecified. The maximum number of marks per domain name is up to server policy. 2.6.1. <launch:codeMark> Element The <launch:codeMark> element is used byincluding boththeverified trademark information"code", "mark", and "code with mark" validation models and has theinformation relatedfollowing child elements: <launch:code>: OPTIONAL mark code used to validate theregistrant's acceptance of the Claims Notice.<mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) information. Theserver MAY supportmark code is a mark-specific secret that theMixed Create Form.server can verify against a third party. The"custom" launch phase SHOULD be used when usingOPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is theMixed Create Form.Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator the code originated from, with no default value. <mark:mark>: OPTIONAL mark information with child elements defined in the Mark section (Section 2.6.2). The following is an example<create> domain command using the <launch:create> extension,<launch:codeMark> element withusing a mix of the Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) and the Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) by includingboth amark<launch:code> anda notice: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="application"> C: <launch:phase name="non-tmch-sunrise">custom</launch:phase> C:<mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element. <launch:codeMark>C:<launch:code validatorID="sample"> 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code> <mark:markC:xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">C:...C:</mark:mark>C:</launch:codeMark>C: <launch:notice> C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC C: </launch:noticeID> C: <launch:notAfter>2012-06-19T10:00:10.0Z C: </launch:notAfter> C: <launch:acceptedDate>2012-06-19T09:01:30.0Z C: </launch:acceptedDate> C: </launch:notice> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.5. Create Response If the create was successful, the server MAY add a <launch:creData>2.6.2. <mark:mark> Element A <mark:mark> elementalong to the regular EPP <resData>describes an applicant's prior right toindicate the server generated Application Identifier (Section 2.1), when multiple applications ofa given domain nameare supported; otherwise no extensionthat isincludedused with theregular EPP <resData>."mark", "mark with code", and "signed mark" validation models. The<launch:creData><mark:mark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new mark format can be supported by creating a new XML schema for the mark that has an element that substitutes for the <mark:abstractMark> element from [RFC7848]. 2.6.3. Digital Signature Digital signatures MAY be used by the server to validate the mark information, when using the "signed mark" validation model with the <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) and <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) elements. When using digital signatures, the server MUST validate the digital signature. 2.6.3.1. <smd:signedMark> Element The <smd:signedMark> element contains thefollowing child elements: <launch:phase>:digitally signed mark information. Thephase<smd:signedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML schema for the signed mark that has an element that substitutes for the <smd:abstractSignedMark> element from [RFC7848]. 2.6.3.2. <smd:encodedSignedMark> Element The <smd:encodedSignedMark> element contains an encoded form of theapplicationdigitally signed <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) element. The <smd:encodedSignedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848]. A new encoded signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML schema for the encoded signed mark thatmirrors the <launch:phase>has an elementincluded in the <launch:create>. <launch:applicationID>: The application identifier of the application. An example response when multiple overlapping applications are supported bythat substitutes for theserver: 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:creData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:crDate>2010-08-10T15:38:26.623854Z</domain:crDate> S: </domain:creData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:creData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>2393-9323-E08C-03B1 S: </launch:applicationID> S: </launch:creData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.4.<smd:encodedSignedMark> element from [RFC7848]. 3. EPP<update>CommandThis extension defines additional elements to extendMapping A detailed description of the EPP<update> command tosyntax and semantics can beusedfound inconjunction withthedomain name mapping. AnEPP<update>core protocol specification [RFC5730]. The commandwithmappings described here are specifically for use in theextension sentLaunch Phase Extension. This mapping is designed to be flexible, requiring only aserver that does not support launch applications will fail. A server thatminimum set of required elements. While it is meant to serve several use cases, it does notsupport launch applications during its launch phase MUST return an EPP error result codeprescribe any interpretation by the client or server. Such processing is typically highly policy dependent and therefore specific to implementations. Operations on application objects are done via one or more of2102 when receiving anthe existing EPP<update> command withcommands defined in theextension. Registry policies permitting, clients may update an application object by submitting anEPP<update> command along with a <launch:update> elementdomain name mapping [RFC5731]. Registries MAY choose toindicatesupport a subset of theapplication objectoperations. 3.1. EPP <check> Command There are three forms of the extension tobe updated.the EPP <check> command: the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), the Availability Check Form (Section 3.1.2), and the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3). The<launch:update><launch:check> elementcontains"type" attribute defines thefollowing child elements: <launch:phase>:form, with the value of "claims" for the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), "avail" for the Availability Check Form (Section 3.1.2), and "trademark" for the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3). Thephase during whichdefault value of theapplication was submitted or"type" attribute isassociated with."claims". Theserver SHOULD validateforms supported by thevalue andserver is determined by server policy. The server MUST return an EPP error result code of23062307 [RFC5730] if it receives a check form that isinvalid. <launch:applicationID>: The application identifier for which the client wishes to update.not supported. 3.1.1. Claims Check Form Thefollowing is an example <update> domain command with the <launch:update> extension to add and remove a name server ofClaims Check Form defines asunrise application withnew command called theapplication identifier "abc123": C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <update> C: <domain:update C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:add> C: <domain:ns> C: <domain:hostObj>ns2.domain.example</domain:hostObj> C: </domain:ns> C: </domain:add> C: <domain:rem> C: <domain:ns> C: <domain:hostObj>ns1.domain.example</domain:hostObj> C: </domain:ns> C: </domain:rem> C: </domain:update> C: </update> C: <extension> C: <launch:update C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> C: </launch:update> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> This extension doesClaims Check Command that is used to determine whether or notdefinethere are anyextension tomatching trademarks, in theresponse of an <update>specified launch phase, for each domaincommand. After processingname passed in the command, that require theserver replies withuse of the "Claims Create Form" on astandard EPP response asDomain Create Command. The availability check information defined in the EPP domain name mapping[RFC5731]. 3.5. EPP <delete> Command[RFC5731] MUST NOT be returned for the Claims Check Command. Thisextension defines additional elements to extendform is theEPP <delete> command todefault form and MAY beused in conjunction withexplicitly identified by setting the <launch:check> "type" attribute to "claims". Instead of returning whether the domain namemapping. A client MUST NOT passis available, theextensionClaims Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching trademark exists for the domain name, which requires the use of the "Claims Create Form" onan EPP <delete> command toaserver that does not support launch applications. A serverDomain Create Command. If there is at least one matching trademark thatdoes not support launch applications during its launch phaseexists for the domain name, a <launch:claimKey> element is returned. The client MAY then use the value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain information needed to generate the Trademark Claims Notice from the Trademark Validator based on the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2). The unique notice identifier of the Trademark Claims Notice MUSTreturn an EPP error result codebe passed in the <launch:noticeID> element of2102 when receiving an EPP <delete> command withtheextension. Registry policies permitting, clients MAY withdraw an application by submitting anextension to the Create Command (Section 3.3). The <domain:name> elements in the EPP<delete><check> commandalong with a <launch:delete> element to indicateof EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] define theapplication objectdomain names tobe deleted.check for matching trademarks. The<launch:delete><launch:check> element contains the following childelements:element: <launch:phase>:TheContains the value of the active launch phaseduring whichof theapplication was submitted or is associated with.server. The server SHOULD validate the valueand return an EPP error result code of 2306 if it is invalid. <launch:applicationID>: The application identifier for which the client wishesaccording todelete.Section 2.3. The following is an example<delete>Claims Check Command using the <check> domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the<launch:delete> extension:"type" explicitly set to "claims", to determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example", and "domain3.example" require claims notices during the "claims" launch phase: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C:<delete><check> C:<domain:delete<domain:check C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C:<domain:name>domain.example</domain:name><domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name> C:</domain:delete><domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name> C:</delete><domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name> C: </domain:check> C: </check> C: <extension> C:<launch:delete<launch:check C:xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C:<launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>type="claims"> C:<launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID><launch:phase>claims</launch:phase> C:</launch:delete></launch:check> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp>This extension does not define any extension to the response of a <delete> domain command. After processing the command, the server replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.6. EPP <renew> Command This extension does not define any extension toIf theEPP <renew><check> commandor response described inhas been processed successfully, the EPPdomain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.7. EPP <transfer> Command This extension does not define any extension to<response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that identifies theEPP <transfer> command or response described inlaunch namespace. The <launch:chkData> element contains theEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 4. Formal Syntaxfollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase that mirrors the <launch:phase> element included in the <launch:check>. <launch:cd>: Oneschema is presented hereor more <launch:cd> elements thatiscontain theEPP Launch Phase Mapping schema. The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representationfollowing child elements: <launch:name>: Contains the fully qualified name of theobject mapping suitablequeried domain name. This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists forautomated validation of EPP XML instances. The BEGIN and END tags are not part oftheschema; they are used to notedomain name that requires thebeginning and endinguse of theschema for URI registration purposes. 4.1. Launch Schema Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust"Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command. A value of "1" (or "true") means that a matching trademark does exist and that thepersons identified as authors"Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. A value of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not exist or that thecode. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with"Claims Create Form" is NOT required on a Domain Create Command. <launch:claimKey>: Zero orwithout modification, are permitted providedmore OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as thefollowing conditions are met: o Redistributions of source code must retainICANN TMCH for querying theabove copyright notice, this list of conditions andinformation needed to generate a Trademark Claims Notice. The <launch:claimKey> is used as thefollowing disclaimer. o Redistributions in binary form must reproducekey for theabove copyright notice, this listquery in place ofconditions andthefollowing disclaimer indomain name to securely query the service without using a well-known value like a domain name. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is thedocumentation and/or other materials providedValidator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator to query for the claims notice information, with thedistribution. o Neitherdefault being thenameICANN TMCH. The "validatorID" attribute MAY reference a non-trademark claims clearinghouse identifier to support other forms ofInternet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, norclaims notices. The following is an example Claims Check response when a claims notice for the "claims" launch phase is not required for thenames of specific contributors, may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. BEGIN <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" xmlns:eppcom="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0" xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0" xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" elementFormDefault="qualified" > <!-- Import common element types. --> <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"/> <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"/> <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"/> <annotation> <documentation> Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0domain nameextension schemadomain1.example, is required for thelaunch phase processing. </documentation> </annotation> <!-- Childdomain name domain2.example in the "tmch", and is required for the domain name domain3.example in the "tmch" and "custom-tmch": 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: <launch:chkData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch"> S: 20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: </launch:chkData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.1.2. Availability Check Form The Availability Check Form defines additional elementsfoundto extend the EPP <check> command described in the EPPcommands --> <element name="check" type="launch:checkType"/> <element name="info" type="launch:infoType"/> <element name="create" type="launch:createType"/> <element name="update" type="launch:idContainerType"/> <element name="delete" type="launch:idContainerType"/> <!-- Common container of id (identifier) element --> <complexType name="idContainerType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <element name="applicationID" type="launch:applicationIDType"/> </sequence> </complexType> <!-- Definition for application identifier --> <simpleType name="applicationIDType"> <restriction base="token"/> </simpleType> <!-- Definitiondomain name mapping [RFC5731]. No additional elements are defined forlaunch phase. Name is an optionalthe EPP <check> response. This form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check> "type" attribute to "avail". The EPP <check> command is used toextenddetermine if an object can be provisioned within a repository. Domain names may be made available only in unique launch phases, whilst remaining unavailable for concurrent launch phases. In addition to the elements expressed in the <domain:check>, thephase type. For example, when usingcommand is extended with the <launch:check> element that contains the following child element: <launch:phase>: The launch phasetypeto which domain name availability should be determined. The server SHOULD validate the value and return an EPP error result code of"custom",2306 [RFC5730] if it is invalid. The following is an example Availability Check Form Command using thename can be used<check> domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set tospecify"avail", to determine the availability of two domain names in the "idn-release" customphase. --> <complexType name="phaseType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:phaseTypeValue"> <attribute name="name" type="token"/>launch phase: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <check> C: <domain:check C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name> C: </domain:check> C: </check> C: <extension> C: <launch:check C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="avail"> C: <launch:phase name="idn-release">custom</launch:phase> C: </launch:check> C: </extension></simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- EnumerationC: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The Availability Check Form does not define any extension to the response oflaunch phase values --> <simpleType name="phaseTypeValue"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="sunrise"/> <enumeration value="landrush"/> <enumeration value="claims"/> <enumeration value="open"/> <enumeration value="custom"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Definition fora <check> domain command. After processing thesunrise code --> <simpleType name="codeValue"> <restriction base="token"> <minLength value="1"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <complexType name="codeType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:codeValue"> <attribute name="validatorID" type="launch:validatorIDType" use="optional"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- Definitioncommand, the server replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.1.3. Trademark Check Form The Trademark Check Form defines a new command called the Trademark Check Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks for each domain name passed in thenotice identifier --> <simpleType name="noticeIDValue"> <restriction base="token"> <minLength value="1"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <complexType name="noticeIDType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:noticeIDValue"> <attribute name="validatorID" type="launch:validatorIDType" use="optional"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- Definition forcommand, independent of thevalidator identifier --> <simpleType name="validatorIDType"> <restriction base="token"> <minLength value="1"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Possible status values for sunrise application --> <simpleType name="statusValueType"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="pendingValidation"/> <enumeration value="validated"/> <enumeration value="invalid"/> <enumeration value="pendingAllocation"/> <enumeration value="allocated"/> <enumeration value="rejected"/> <enumeration value="custom"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Status type definition --> <complexType name="statusType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="normalizedString"> <attribute name="s" type="launch:statusValueType" use="required"/> <attribute name="lang" type="language" default="en"/> <attribute name="name" type="token"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- codeMark Type that contains an optional code with markactive launch phase of the server and whether the "Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command. The availability check information--> <complexType name="codeMarkType"> <sequence> <element name="code" type="launch:codeType" minOccurs="0"/> <element ref="mark:abstractMark" minOccurs="0"/> </sequence> </complexType> <!-- Child elementsdefined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] MUST NOT be returned for thecreate command --> <complexType name="createType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <choice minOccurs="0"> <element name="codeMark" type="launch:codeMarkType" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <element ref="smd:abstractSignedMark" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <element ref="smd:encodedSignedMark" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </choice> <element name="notice" type="launch:createNoticeType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> <attribute name="type" type="launch:objectType"/> </complexType> <!-- TypeTrademark Check Command. This form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check> "type" attribute to "trademark". Instead oflaunch object --> <simpleType name="objectType"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="application"/> <enumeration value="registration"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Child elementsreturning whether the domain name is available, the Trademark Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching trademark exists for the domain name. If there is at least one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a <launch:claimKey> element is returned. The client MAY then use the value of thecreate notice<launch:claimKey> element--> <complexType name="createNoticeType"> <sequence> <element name="noticeID" type="launch:noticeIDType"/> <element name="notAfter" type="dateTime"/> <element name="acceptedDate" type="dateTime"/> </sequence> </complexType> <!-- Childto obtain Trademark Claims Notice information from the Trademark Validator based on the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2). The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check(Claimsfor matching trademarks. The <launch:check> element does not contain any child elements with the "Trademark CheckCommand) --> <complexType name="checkType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType" minOccurs="0"/> </sequence> <attribute name="type" type="launch:checkFormType" default="claims"/> </complexType> <!-- Type of check form (ClaimsForm": The following is an example Trademark Checkor Availability Check) --> <simpleType name="checkFormType"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="claims"/> <enumeration value="avail"/> <enumeration value="trademark"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Child elements of info command --> <complexType name="infoType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <element name="applicationID" type="launch:applicationIDType" minOccurs="0"/> </sequence> <attribute name="includeMark" type="boolean" default="false"/> </complexType> <!-- Child response elements. --> <element name="chkData" type="launch:chkDataType"/> <element name="creData" type="launch:idContainerType"/> <element name="infData" type="launch:infDataType"/> <!--Command using the <check>response elements. --> <complexType name="chkDataType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType" minOccurs="0"/> <element name="cd" type="launch:cdType" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> </complexType> <complexType name="cdType"> <sequence> <element name="name" type="launch:cdNameType"/> <element name="claimKey" type="launch:claimKeyType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> </complexType> <complexType name="cdNameType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="eppcom:labelType"> <attribute name="exists" type="boolean" use="required"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <complexType name="claimKeyType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="token"> <attribute name="validatorID" type="launch:validatorIDType" use="optional"/>domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set to "trademark", to determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example", and "domain3.example" have any matching trademarks: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <check> C: <domain:check C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name> C: <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name> C: </domain:check> C: </check> C: <extension> C: <launch:check C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="trademark"/> C: </extension></simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- <info> responseC: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP <response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that identifies the launch namespace. The <launch:chkData> element contains the following child elements: <launch:cd>: One or more <launch:cd> elements--> <complexType name="infDataType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <element name="applicationID" type="launch:applicationIDType" minOccurs="0"/> <element name="status" type="launch:statusType" minOccurs="0"/> <element ref="mark:abstractMark" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> </complexType> </schema> END 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. XML Namespacethat contain the following child elements: <launch:name>: Contains the fully qualified name of the queried domain name. Thisdocument uses URNselement MUST contain an "exists" attribute whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the domain name. A value of "1" (or "true") means that a matching trademark does exist. A value of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not exist. <launch:claimKey>: Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be passed todescribe XML namespaces and XML schemas conforminga third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN TMCH for querying the information needed to generate aregistry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. Registration requestTrademark Claims Notice. The <launch:claimKey> is used as the key for thelaunch namespace: URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0 Registrant Contact: IESG XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification. Registration requestquery in place of the domain name to securely query the service without using a well-known value like a domain name. The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator to query for thelaunch XML schema: URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:launch-1.0 Registrant Contact: IESG XML: Seeclaims notice information, with the"Formal Syntax" sectiondefault being the ICANN TMCH. The "validatorID" attribute MAY reference a non-trademark claims clearinghouse identifier to support other forms ofthis document. 5.2. EPP Extension Registryclaims notices. TheEPP extension described in this document should be registered byfollowing is an example Trademark Check response for theIANA in"claims" launch phase when no matching trademarks are found for theEPP Extension Registry describeddomain name domain1.example, matching trademarks are found for the domain name domain2.example in[RFC7451]. The details oftheregistration"tmch", and matching trademarks areas follows: Name of Extension: "Launch Phase Mappingfound for domain name domain3.example in theExtensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)" Document status: Standards Track Reference: (insert reference to RFC version of this document) Registrant Name"tmch" andEmail Address: IESG, <iesg@ietf.org> TLDs: Any IPR Disclosure: None Status: Active Notes: None 6. Implementation Status Note"custom-tmch": 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: <launch:chkData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: <launch:cd> S: <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch"> S: 2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001 S: </launch:claimKey> S: <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch"> S: 20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002 S: </launch:claimKey> S: </launch:cd> S: </launch:chkData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.2. EPP <info> Command This extension defines additional elements toRFC Editor: Please remove this sectionextend the EPP <info> command andthe referenceresponse toRFC 7942 [RFC7942] before publication. This section records the status of known implementations of the protocol defined by this specification atbe used in conjunction with thetime of posting of this [RFC7942].EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. Thedescription of implementations in this sectionEPP <info> command isintended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort has been spentused toverify theretrieve informationpresented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be,for acatalog of available implementationsLaunch Registration ortheir features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may exist. According to RFC 7942 [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that haveLaunch Application. The Application Identifier (Section 2.1) returned in thebenefit of running code, which may serve as evidence<launch:creData> element ofvaluable experimentation and feedback that have madetheimplemented protocols more mature. Itcreate response (Section 3.3) can be used for retrieving information for a Launch Application. A <launch:info> element isup tosent along with theindividual working groups to use this information as they see fit". 6.1. Verisign EPP SDK Organization: Verisign Inc. Name: Verisign EPP SDK Description:regular <info> domain command. TheVerisign EPP SDK<launch:info> element includesboth a full client implementation andan OPTIONAL "includeMark" boolean attribute, with afull server stub implementation of draft-ietf- regext-launchphase. Level of maturity: Production Coverage: All aspectsdefault value of "false", to indicate whether or not to include theprotocol are implemented. Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License Contact: jgould@verisign.com URL: http://www.verisigninc.com/en_US/channel-resources/domain- registry-products/epp-sdks 6.2. Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) SRS Organization: Verisign Inc. Name: Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) Shared Registry System (SRS) Description: The Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) Shared Registry System (SRS) implementsmark in theserver-side of draft-ietf- regext-launchphase for a variety of Top Level Domains (TLD's). Level of maturity: Production Coverage:response. The"signed mark" Mark Validation Model,<launch:info> element contains theClaims Check Form forfollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase during which theEPP <check> Command,application or registration was submitted or is associated with. Server policy defines theSunrise and Claims Forms forphases that are supported. The server SHOULD validate the value and return an EPP<create> Commanderror result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if it is invalid. <launch:applicationID>: OPTIONAL application identifier ofLaunch Registrations and Launch Applications. For Launch Applications the Poll Messaging,theEPPLaunch Application. The following is an example <info>Command,domain command with theEPP <update> Command, and<launch:info> extension to retrieve information for theEPP <delete> Command is covered. Licensing: Proprietary Contact: jgould@verisign.com 6.3. Verisign .COM / .NET SRS Organization: Verisign Inc. Name: Verisign .COM / .NET Shared Registry System (SRS) Description: The Verisign Shared Registry System (SRS)sunrise application for.COM, .NETdomain.example andother IDN TLD's implements the server-side of draft-ietf-regext- launchphase. Level of maturity: Operational Test Environment (OTE) Coverage:application identifier "abc123": C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <info> C: <domain:info C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: </domain:info> C: </info> C: <extension> C: <launch:info C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: includeMark="true"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> C: </launch:info> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The"signed mark" Mark Validation Model,following is an example <info> domain command with theClaims Check Form<launch:info> extension to retrieve information for theEPP <check> Command, the Sunrise and Claims Formssunrise registration for domain.example: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <info> C: <domain:info C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: </domain:info> C: </info> C: <extension> C: <launch:info C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: </launch:info> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> If theEPP <create> Command of Launch Registrations. Licensing: Proprietary Contact: jgould@verisign.com 6.4. REngin v3.7 Organization: Domain Name Services (Pty) Ltd Name: REngin v3.7 Description: Server side implementation only Level of maturity: Production Coverage: All features from version 12 have been implemented Licensing: Proprietary Licensingquery was successful, the server replies withMaintenance Contracts Contact: info@dnservices.co.za URL: https://www.registry.net.za and soon http://dnservices.co.za 6.5. RegistryEngine EPP Service Organization: CentralNic Name: RegistryEngine EPP Service Description: Generic high-volume EPP service for gTLDs, ccTLDs and SLDs Level of maturity: Deployed in CentralNic's production environment as well as two other gTLD registry systems, and two ccTLD registry systems. Coverage: Majority of elements including TMCH sunrise, landrush and TM claims as well as sunrise applications validated using codes. Licensing: Proprietary In-House software Contact: epp@centralnic.com URL: https://www.centralnic.com 6.6. Neustar EPP SDK Organization: Neustar Name: Neustar EPP SDK Description: The Neustar EPP SDK includes client implementation of draft-ietf-regext-launchphase in both Java and C++. Level of maturity: Production Coverage: All aspects ofa <launch:infData> element along with the regular EPP <resData>. The <launch:infData> contains theprotocol are implemented. Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License Contact: trung.tran@neustar.biz 6.7. gTLD Shared Registry System Organization: Stichting Internet Domeinnaamregistratie Nederland (SIDN) Name: gTLD Shared Registry System Description:following child elements: <launch:phase>: ThegTLD SRS implementsphase during which theserver side ofapplication was submitted or is associated with that matches thedraft- ietf-regext-launchphase. Levelassociated <info> command <launch:phase>. <launch:applicationID>: OPTIONAL Application Identifier ofmaturity: (soon) Production Coverage: The following partsthe Launch Application. <launch:status>: OPTIONAL status of thedraft are supported: Signed mark validation modelLaunch Application usingDigital Signature (Section 2.6.3) Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1) Sunrise Create Formone of the supported status values (Section3.3.1) Claims Create Form2.4). <mark:mark>: Zero or more <mark:mark> (Section3.3.2) The parts of2.6.2) elements only if thedocument not described here are not implemented. Licensing: Proprietary Contact: rik.ribbers@sidn.nl 7. Security Considerations The mapping extensions described"includeMark" attribute is "true" inthis document do not provide any security services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730],theEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731], and protocol layers used by EPP.command. Thesecurity considerations described in these other specifications apply to this specification as well. Updates to, and deletion of an application object MUST be restricted to clients authorized to perform the said operation on the object. Information contained withinfollowing is anapplication, or evenexample <info> domain response using themere fact that an application exists may be confidential. Any attempt to operate on an application object by an unauthorized client MUST be rejected<launch:infData> extension withanthe mark information: 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>domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:roid>EXAMPLE1-REP</domain:roid> S: <domain:status s="pendingCreate"/> S: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> S: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> S: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> S: <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID> S: <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID> S: <domain:crDate>2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate> S: <domain:authInfo> S: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> S: </domain:authInfo> S: </domain:infData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:infData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> S: <launch:status s="pendingValidation"/> S: <mark:mark S: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> S: ... S: </mark:mark> S: </launch:infData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.3. EPP2201 (authorization error) return code. Server policy may allow <info> operation with filtered output by clients other than the sponsoring client, in which case the <domain:infData> and <launch:infData> response SHOULD be filtered to include only fields that<create> Command There arepublicly accessible. 8. Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts of the leading participantsfour forms of theCommunity TMCH Model that ledextension tomany ofthechanges to this document, which include Chris Wright, Jeff Neuman, Jeff Eckhaus, and Will Shorter. Special suggestionsEPP <create> command thathave been incorporated into this document were provided by Harald Alvestrand, Ben Campbell, Spencer Dawkins, Jothan Frakes, Keith Gaughan, Seth Goldman, Scott Hollenbeck, Michael Holloway, Jan Jansen, Rubens Kuhl, Mirja Kuhlewind, Warren Kumari, Ben Levac, Gustavo Lozano, Klaus Malorny, Alexander Mayrhofer, Alexey Melnikov, Patrick Mevzek, James Mitchell, Francisco Obispo, Mike O'Connell, Eric Rescoria, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer, Sabrina Tanamal, Trung Tran, Ulrich Wisser and Sharon Wodjenski. Some ofinclude thedescription ofSunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1), theTrademarkClaimsPhase was basedCreate Form (Section 3.3.2), the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3), and the Mixed Create Form (Section 3.3.4). The form used is dependent on thework donesupported launch phases (Section 2.3) as defined below. sunrise: The EPP <create> command with the "sunrise" launch phase is used to submit a registration with trademark information that can be verified byGustavo Lozano intheICANN TMCH functional specifications. 9. References 9.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key wordsserver with the <domain:name> value. The Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) is used for the "sunrise" launch phase. landrush: The EPP <create> command with the "landrush" launch phase MAY usein RFCsthe General Create Form (Section 3.3.3) toIndicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc- editor.org/info/rfc2119>. [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, <https://www.rfc- editor.org/info/rfc3688>. [RFC5646] Phillips, A., Ed.explicitly specify the phase andM. Davis, Ed., "Tags for Identifying Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, DOI 10.17487/RFC5646, September 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5646>. [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>. [RFC7848] Lozano, G., "Markoptionally define the expected type of object to create. claims: The EPP <create> command with the "claims" launch phase is used to pass the information associated with the presentation andSigned Mark Objects Mapping", RFC 7848, DOI 10.17487/RFC7848, June 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7848>. [RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awarenessacceptance ofRunning Code:the claims notice. TheImplementation Status Section", BCP 205, RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>. 9.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec] Lozano, G., "ICANN TMCH functional specifications", draft- ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-03 (work in progress), July 2017. [RFC7451] Hollenbeck, S., "Extension RegistryClaims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) is used, and the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3) MAY be used for theExtensible Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451, February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>. Appendix A. Change History A.1. Change from 00"claims" launch phase. open: The EPP <create> command with the "open" launch phase is undefined, but the form supported is up to01 1. Changedserver policy. The Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be used touse camel case forpass theXML elements. 2. Replaced "cancelled" status to "rejected" status. 3. Addedinformation associated with thechild elementspresentation and acceptance of the<claim> element. 4. Removedclaims notice if required for theXML schema and replaceddomain name. custom: The EPP <create> command with"[TBD]". A.2. Change from 01 to 02 1. Added support for boththeICANN and ARI/Neustar TMCH models. 2. Changed"custom" launch phase is undefined, but thenamespace URI and prefixform supported is up touse "launch" instead of "launchphase". 3. Added definitionserver policy. 3.3.1. Sunrise Create Form The Sunrise Create Form ofmultiple claim validation models. 4. Addedthe<launch:signedClaim> and <launch:signedNotice> elements. 5. Added support for Claims Info Command A.3. Change from 02extension to03 1. Removed XSI namespace per Keith Gaughan's suggestion ontheprovreg list. 2. Added extensibility toEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] includes thelaunch:status element and addedverifiable trademark information that thependingAuction status per Trung Tran's feedback onserver uses to match against theprovreg list. 3. Addeddomain name to authorize the domain create. A server MUST supportforone of four models in Mark Validation Models (Section 2.6) to verify theClaims Check Command, updatedtrademark information passed by thelocation and contentsclient. A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create> domain command. The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type" attribute that defines the expected type of object ("application" or "registration") to create. The server SHOULD validate thesignedNotice,"type" attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be created, andreplaced most referencesreturn an EPP error result code ofClaim to Mark based on2306 [RFC5730] if thework being done ontype is incorrect. The <launch:create> element contains the following child elements: <launch:phase>: The identifier for theARI/Neustarlaunchmodel. A.4. Change from 03 to 04 1. Removed referencesphase. The server SHOULD validate the value according to Section 2.3. <launch:codeMark> or <smd:signedMark> or <smd:encodedSignedMark>: <launch:codeMark>: Zero or more <launch:codeMark> elements. The <launch:codeMark> child elements are defined in "<launch:codeMark> Element" (Section 2.6.1). <smd:signedMark>: Zero or more <smd:signedMark> elements. The <smd:signedMark> child elements are defined in "<smd:signedMark> Element" (Section 2.6.3.1). <smd:encodedSignedMark>: Zero or more <smd:encodedSignedMark> elements. The <smd:encodedSignedMark> child elements are defined in "<smd:encodedSignedMark> Element" (Section 2.6.3.2). The following is an example <create> domain command using theICANN model. 2. Removed support for the Claims Info Command. 3. Removed use of<launch:create> extension, following thesignedClaim. 4. Revised"code" validation model, with multiple sunrise codes: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code validatorID="sample1"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code> C: </launch:codeMark> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code>49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AD</launch:code> C: </launch:codeMark> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code validatorID="sample2"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AE</launch:code> C: </launch:codeMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The following is an example <create> domain command using themethod for referring to<launch:create> extension, following thesignedClaim from"mark" validation model, with theXML Signaturemark information: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <mark:mark C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> C: ... C: </mark:mark> C: </launch:codeMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The following is an example <create> domain command using theIDREF URI. 5. Split<launch:create> extension, following the "code with mark" validation model, with thelaunch-1.0.xsd into three XML schemas including launch- 1.0.xsd, signeMark-1.0.xsd,code andmark-1.0.xsd. 6. Split the "claims" launch phase tomark information: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <launch:code validatorID="sample"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code> C: <mark:mark C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> C: ... C: </mark:mark> C: </launch:codeMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The following is an example <create> domain command using the"claims1" and "claims2" launch phases. 7. Added support for<launch:create> extension, following theencodedSignedMark"signed mark" validation model, withbase64 encoded signedMark. 8. Changedtheelements insigned mark information for a sunrise application: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="application"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <smd:signedMark id="signedMark" C: xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"> C: ... C: </smd:signedMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> The following is an example <create> domain command using thecreateNoticeType to include<launch:create> extension, following thenoticeID, timestamp, and"signed mark" validation model, with thesource elements. 9. Addedbase64-encoded signed mark information: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <smd:encodedSignedMark C: xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"> C: ... C: </smd:encodedSignedMark> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.2. Claims Create Form The Claims Create Form of theclass and effectiveDate elements to mark. A.5. Change from 04 to 05 1. Removed referenceextension to<smd:zone> inthe<smd:signedMark> example. 2. Incorporated feedback from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer onEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] includes theprovreg mail list. 3. Added missing launch XML prefixinformation related toapplicationIDType reference intheidContainerTyperegistrant's acceptance of theLaunch Schema. 4. Added missing description ofclaims notice. A <launch:create> element is sent along with the<mark:pc>regular <create> domain command. The <launch:create> elementinhas an OPTIONAL "type" attribute that defines the<mark:addr> element. 5. Updated note on replicationexpected type ofthe EPP contact mapping elements in the Mark Contact section. A.6. Change from 05object ("application" or "registration") to06 1. Removedcreate. The server SHOULD validate thedefinition of"type" attribute, when passed, against themark-1.0 and signedMark-1.0 and replaced with reference to draft-lozano-smd,type of object thatcontainswill be created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if thedefinition fortype is incorrect. The <launch:create> element contains themark, signed marked, and encoded signed mark. 2. Splitfollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: Contains the<launch:timestamp> into <launch:generatedDate> and <launch:acceptedDate> based on feedback from Trung Tran. 3. Addedvalue of the"includeMark" optional attribute toactive launch phase of the<launch:info> element to enableserver. The server SHOULD validate theclientvalue according torequest whetherSection 2.3. <launch:notice>: One ornot to include the mark inmore <launch:notice> elements that contain theinfo response. 4. Fixed state diagram to remove redundant transition from "invalid" to "rejected"; thanks Klaus Malorny. A.7. Change from 06 to 07 1. Proof-read grammar and spelling. 2. Changed "pendingAuction" status to "pendingAllocation", changed "pending" to "pendingValidation" status, per proposal from Trung Tran and seconded by Rubens Kuhl. 3. Added text related tofollowing child elements: <launch:noticeID>: Unique notice identifier for theuse of RFC 5731 pendingCreateclaims notice. The <launch:noticeID> element has an OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute that is used to define theApplicationValidator Identifiersection. 4. Added(Section 2.2); it's value indicates which Trademark Validator is thePoll Messaging section to definesource of theuseclaims notice, with the default being the ICANN TMCH. <launch:notAfter>: Expiry ofpoll messaging for intermediate state transitionsthe claims notice. <launch:acceptedDate>: Contains the date andpending action poll messaging for final state transitions. A.8. Change from 07 to 08 1. Added supporttime that the claims notice was accepted. The following is an example <create> domain command using the <launch:create> extension with the <launch:notice> information foruse ofthelaunch statuses"tmch" andpoll messagingthe "custom-tmch" validators, forLaunch Registrations based on feedback from Sharon Wodjenski and Trung Tran. 2. Incorporated changes based on updates or clarifications in draft- lozano-tmch-func-spec-01, which include: 1. Removedtheunused <launch:generatedDate> element. 2. Removed"claims" launch phase: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase> C: <launch:notice> C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch"> C: 370d0b7c9223372036854775807</launch:noticeID> C: <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z C: </launch:notAfter> C: <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:00.0Z C: </launch:acceptedDate> C: </launch:notice> C: <launch:notice> C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="custom-tmch"> C: 470d0b7c9223654313275808</launch:noticeID> C: <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z C: </launch:notAfter> C: <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:30.0Z C: </launch:acceptedDate> C: </launch:notice> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.3. General Create Form The General Create Form of the<launch:source> element. 3. Addedextension to the<launch:notAfter> element based onEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] includes therequired <tmNotice:notAfter> element. A.9. Change from 08 to 09 1. Made <choice> element optional in <launch:create> to allow passing justlaunch phase and optionally the<launch:phase> in <launch:create> per request from Ben Levac. 2. Added optionalobject type to create. The OPTIONAL "type" attributein <launch:create> to enable the client to explicitly definedefines thedesiredexpected type of object(application("application" orregistration) to create"registration") toall forms of the create extension. 3. Added text that thecreate. The server SHOULD validate the<launch:phase> element in"type" attribute, when passed, against theLaunch Phases section. 4. Addtype of object that will be created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if the"General Create Form" totype is incorrect. A <launch:create> element is sent along with thecreate command extension to supportregular <create> domain command. The <launch:create> element contains therequest from Ben Levac. 5. Updatedfollowing child element: <launch:phase>: Contains thetext forvalue of thePoll Messaging section based on feedback from Klaus Malorny. 6. Replacedactive launch phase of the"claims1" and "claims2" phases withserver. The server SHOULD validate the"claims" phase based on discussion onvalue according to Section 2.3. The following is an example <create> domain command using theprovreg list. 7. Added support<launch:create> extension for amixed create model (Sunrise Create Model and Claims Create Model), where a trademark (encoded signed mark, etc.) and notice can be passed, based on a request from James Mitchell. 8. Added text for the handling of the overlapping "claims" and"landrush" launchphases. 9. Added support for two check forms (claims check form and availability check form) based on a request from James Mitchell. The availability check form was based on the text in draft-rbp- application-epp-mapping. A.10. Change from 09 to 10 1. Changed noticeIDType from base64Binary to token to be compatible with draft-lozano-tmch-func-spec-05. 2. Changed codeType from base64Binary to token to be more generic. 3. Updated based on feedback from Alexander Mayrhofer, which include: 1. Changed "extension tophase application: 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>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="application"> C: <launch:phase>landrush</launch:phase> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.4. Mixed Create Form The Mixed Create Form supports a mix of thedomain name extension" to "extension tocreate forms where, for example, thedomain name mapping". 2. Changed use of 2004 return code to 2306 return code when phase passed mismatches active phase and sub-phase. 3. Changed description of "allocated"Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) and"rejected" statuses. 4. Moved sentence onthe Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be supported in asynchronous <domain:create>single commandwithoutby including both theuseverified trademark information and the information related to the registrant's acceptance ofan intermediate application, then an Application Identifierthe claims notice. The server MAYnot be needed tosupport theApplication Identifier section. 5. RestructuredMixed Create Form. The "custom" launch phase SHOULD be used when using theMark Validation Models section to includeMixed Create Form. The following is an example <create> domain command using the"<launch:codeMark> element" sub-section,<launch:create> extension, with a mix of the"<mark:mark> element" sub-section,Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) and theDigital Signature sub-section. 6. Changed "Registries may" to "Registries MAY". 7. Changed "extensed" to "extended" in "Availability Check Form" section. 8. BrokeClaims Create Form (Section 3.3.2), including both a mark and a notice: 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>domainone.example</domain:name> C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant> C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact> C: <domain:authInfo> C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw> C: </domain:authInfo> C: </domain:create> C: </create> C: <extension> C: <launch:create C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" C: type="application"> C: <launch:phase name="non-tmch-sunrise">custom</launch:phase> C: <launch:codeMark> C: <mark:mark C: xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"> C: ... C: </mark:mark> C: </launch:codeMark> C: <launch:notice> C: <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch"> C: 49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC C: </launch:noticeID> C: <launch:notAfter>2012-06-19T10:00:10.0Z C: </launch:notAfter> C: <launch:acceptedDate>2012-06-19T09:01:30.0Z C: </launch:acceptedDate> C: </launch:notice> C: </launch:create> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> 3.3.5. Create Response If themix ofcreateforms inwas successful, the"EPP <create> Command" section toserver MAY add afourth "Mixed Create Form" with its own sub- section. 9. Removed "displayed or" from "displayed or accepted" in<launch:creData> element to the regular EPP <resData> to indicate that the<launch:acceptedDate> description. 10. Replaced "givenserver generated an Application Identifier (Section 2.1), when multiple applications of a given domain name are supported; otherwise, no extension issupported"included with"given domain name are supported" inthe"Create Response" section. 11. Changedregular EPP <resData>. The <launch:creData> element contains thereferencefollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase of2303 (object does not exist) in the "Security Considerations" section to 2201 (authorization error). 12. Added arrow from "invalid" status to "pendingValidation" status and "pendingAllocation" status to "rejected" status intheState Transition Diagram. 4. Addedapplication that mirrors the"C:" and "S:" example prefixes and related text<launch:phase> element included in the"Conventions Used in This Document" section. A.11. Change from 10 to 11 1. Moved<launch:create>. <launch:applicationID>: The application identifier of theclaims checkapplication. The following is an example response<launch:chkData> element under the <extension> element instead ofwhen multiple overlapping applications are supported by the server: 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>element based on the request from Francisco Obispo. A.12. Change from 11S: <domain:creData S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> S: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> S: <domain:crDate>2010-08-10T15:38:26.623854Z</domain:crDate> S: </domain:creData> S: </resData> S: <extension> S: <launch:creData S: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> S: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> S: <launch:applicationID>2393-9323-E08C-03B1 S: </launch:applicationID> S: </launch:creData> S: </extension> S: <trID> S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID> S: </trID> S: </response> S:</epp> 3.4. EPP <update> Command This extension defines additional elements to12 1. Added support for multiple validator identifiers for claims notices and marks based on a request and text provided by Mike O'Connell. 2. Removed domain:exDate element from example in section 3.3.5 based on a request from Seth Goldman onextend the EPP <update> command to be used in conjunction with theprovreg list. 3. Added clarifying text for clients not passingdomain name mapping. When an EPP <update> command with thelaunchextensionon update and delete commandsis sent toserversa server thatdodoes not support Launch Applications, it will fail. A server that does not support Launch Applications during its launchapplications based on a request from Sharon Wodjenski on the provreg list. A.13. Change from 12 to EPPEXT 00 1. Changed to eppext working group draft by changing draft-tan-epp- launchphase to draft-ietf-eppext-launchphase and by changing referencesphase MUST return an EPP error result code ofdraft-lozano-tmch-smd to draft-ietf-eppext-tmch- smd. A.14. Change EPPEXT 00 to EPPEXT 01 1. Removed text associated2102 [RFC5730] when receiving an EPP <update> command withsupport for the combining of status values based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek on the provreg mailing list, discussion on the eppext mailing list, and discussion at the eppext IETF meeting on March 6, 2014. A.15. Change EPPEXT 01 to EPPEXT 02 1. Changedthe<launch:claim>extension. Registry policies permitting, clients may update an application object by submitting an EPP <update> command along with a <launch:update> element tobe zero or more elements andindicate the<launch:notice> elementapplication object to beone or more elements inupdated. The <launch:update> element contains theClaims Create Form. These changes were needed to be able to support more than one concurrent claims services. A.16. Change EPPEXT 02 to EPPEXT 03 1. Addedfollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase during which the"Implementation Status" section based on an action item fromapplication was submitted or is associated with. The server SHOULD validate theeppext IETF-91 meeting. 2. Moved Section 7 "IANA Considerations"value andSection 9 "Security Considerations" before Section 5 "Acknowledgements". Moved "Change Log" Section to end. 3. Updated the textreturn an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if it is invalid. <launch:applicationID>: The application identifier for which theClaims Check Form and the Claims Create Formclient wishes tosupport checking for the need of the claims notice and passing the claims notice outside of the "claims" phase. 4. Addedupdate. The following is an example <update> domain command with thenew Trademark Check Form<launch:update> extension tosupport determining whether or notadd and remove atrademark exists that matches the domainnameindependentserver ofwhether a claims notice is required on create. This was based on a request from Trung Tran andadiscussion onsunrise application with theeppext mailing list. A.17. Change EPPEXT 03 to EPPEXT 04 1. Amended XML Namespace section of IANA Considerations, added EPP Extension Registry section. A.18. Change EPPEXT 04 to EPPEXT 05 1. Added a missing commaapplication identifier "abc123": C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <update> C: <domain:update C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: <domain:add> C: <domain:ns> C: <domain:hostObj>ns2.domain.example</domain:hostObj> C: </domain:ns> C: </domain:add> C: <domain:rem> C: <domain:ns> C: <domain:hostObj>ns1.domain.example</domain:hostObj> C: </domain:ns> C: </domain:rem> C: </domain:update> C: </update> C: <extension> C: <launch:update C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> C: </launch:update> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> This extension does not define any extension to thedescriptonresponse of an <update> domain command. After processing the<launch:phase> element, based on feedback from Keith Gaughan on the eppext mailing list. 2. Addedcommand, theSIDN implementation status information. 3. Fixedserver replies with afew indentation issuesstandard EPP response as defined in thesamples. A.19. Change EPPEXT 05EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.5. EPP <delete> Command This extension defines additional elements toEPPEXT 06 1. Removed duplicate "TMCH Functional Specification" URIs based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck onextend theeppext mailing list. 2. Changed references of example?.tld to domain?.exampleEPP <delete> command to beconsistentused in conjunction with the domain name mapping. A client MUST NOT pass the extension on an EPP <delete> command to a server that does not support Launch Applications. A server that does not support Launch Applications during its launch phase MUST return an EPP error result code of 2102 [RFC5730] when receiving an EPP <delete> command with the extension. Registry policies permitting, clients MAY withdraw an application by submitting an EPP <delete> command along withRFC 6761 based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck on the eppext mailing list. 3. A template was added to section 5a <launch:delete> element toregisterindicate theXML schema in additionapplication object to be deleted. The <launch:delete> element contains thenamespace based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck onfollowing child elements: <launch:phase>: The phase during which theeppext mailing list. A.20. Change EPPEXT 06 to EPPEXT 07 1. Changed reference of lozano-tmch-func-spec to ietf-eppext-tmch- func-spec. A.21. Change from EPPEXT 07 to REGEXT 00 1. Changed to regext working group draft by changing draft-ietf- eppext-launchphase to draft-ietf-regext-launchphaseapplication was submitted or is associated with. The server SHOULD validate the value andby changing references of draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-func-spec to draft- ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec. A.22. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 1. Fixed referencereturn an EPP error result code ofClaims Check Command to Trademark Check Command in2306 [RFC5730] if it is invalid. <launch:applicationID>: The application identifier for which theTrademark Check Form section. 2. Replaced reference of draft-ietf-eppext-tmch-smd to RFC 7848. A.23. Change from REGEXT 01client wishes toREGEXT 02 1. Removeddelete. The following is an example <delete> domain command with thereference<launch:delete> extension: C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> C: <command> C: <delete> C: <domain:delete C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> C: <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name> C: </domain:delete> C: </delete> C: <extension> C: <launch:delete C: xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"> C: <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase> C: <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID> C: </launch:delete> C: </extension> C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> C: </command> C:</epp> This extension does not define any extension toietf-regext-tmch-func-spec and briefly describedthetrademark claims phase that is relavent to draft- ietf-regext-launchphase. A.24. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 1. Ping update. A.25. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 1. Updates based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck that include: 1. Nit on reference to RFC 7848 in section 1. 2. Added reference to <domain:create> forresponse of a <delete> domain command. After processing therequest to createcommand, the server replies with aLaunch Applicationstandard EPP response as defined insection 2.1. 3. Removedthesecond paragraph of section 2.1 describingEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.6. EPP <renew> Command This extension does not define any extension to theoption of creating an application identifier for a Launch Registration. 4. Provided clarificationEPP <renew> command or response described insection 2.2 on the responsibility oftheserverEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. 3.7. EPP <transfer> Command This extension does not define any extension toensure that the supported validator identifiers are unique. 5. UpdatedthetextEPP <transfer> command or response described insection 2.5 referencingthe EPP domain nameobject in RFC 5731. 6. Updated the copyright to 2017mapping [RFC5731]. 4. Formal Syntax The EPP Launch Phase Mapping schema is presented insectionSection 4.1.A.26. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 1. Updates based on feedback from Ulrich Wisser that include: 1. Updated reference to obsoleted RFC 6982 with RFC 7942. 2. Moved RFC 7451 reference from normative to informative. A.27. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 1. Updates based on feedback from Adam Roach that include: 1. Added an informative reference to draft-ietf-regext-tmch- func-spec in section 2.3.1 "Trademark Claims Phase". 2. AddedThe formaldefinition ofsyntax presented is aLaunch Registration and Launch Application to section 1.1. 3. Updated the descriptioncomplete schema representation of theValidator Identifier to indicate that the uniqueness is based on server policy. 4. Updated "Does Domain have Claims?" "No"object mapping suitable for automated validation of EPP XML instances. The BEGIN and"Yes" branch labels in Figure 1. 5. Updated the descriptionEND tags are not part of the<launch:phase> element in the commandsschema; they are used toexplicitly specifynote thereturn of a 2306 EPP error result when invalid or referring to section 2.3 for validation. 6. Fixed indentationbeginning and ending of the<launch:applicationID>schema for URI registration purposes. 4.1. Launch Schema Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and<launch:status> elements in the section 2.5 examples. 7. Updatedthedescriptionpersons identified as authors of the<mark:mark> elementcode. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that theinfo response. 8. Added returning an EPP error result codefollowing conditions are met: o Redistributions of2306 ifsource code must retain the"type" attribute is incorrect in section 3.3.1, 3.3.2,above copyright notice, this list of conditions and3.3.3. 9. Made small changethe following disclaimer. o Redistributions in binary form must reproduce thedescriptionabove copyright notice, this list of conditions and theCreate Responsefollowing disclaimer insection 3.3.5. 10. UpdatedtheRegistrant Contact in section 7 todocumentation and/or other materials provided with theIESG. A.28. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07 1. Updates based on feedback from Mirja Kuhlewind that include: 1. Indistribution. o Neither theSecurity Considerations section, change must to MUST in "Updates to, and deletionname ofan application object MUST be restricted to clients authorized to perform the said operation on the object". 2. Updates based on feedback from Warren Kumari that include: 1. Removed the comma from "The Validator Identifier isInternet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, nor theidentifier, that is unique..." not needed duenames of specific contributors, may be used tochange from Harald Alvestrand's feedback. 3. Updates based on feedbackendorse or promote products derived fromAlexey Melnikov that include: 1. Added a Normative Reference to RFC 5646this software without specific prior written permission. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. BEGIN <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0" xmlns:eppcom="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0" xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0" xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" elementFormDefault="qualified"> <!-- Import common element types --> <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"/> <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"/> <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"/> <annotation> <documentation> Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0 domain name extension schema for the"language" attribute. 2. Replace identifer with identifier". 3. Remove "for"launch phase processing. </documentation> </annotation> <!-- Child elements found in"EnumerationEPP commands --> <element name="check" type="launch:checkType"/> <element name="info" type="launch:infoType"/> <element name="create" type="launch:createType"/> <element name="update" type="launch:idContainerType"/> <element name="delete" type="launch:idContainerType"/> <!-- Common container of id (identifier) element --> <complexType name="idContainerType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <element name="applicationID" type="launch:applicationIDType"/> </sequence> </complexType> <!-- Definition forlaunch phase values" 4. Updates based on feedback from Harald Alvestrand that include: 1. Removed the references to the unused "launch-1.0", "signedMark-1.0", and "mark-1.0" abbreviations and revised the XML namespace prefix definitionsapplication identifier --> <simpleType name="applicationIDType"> <restriction base="token"/> </simpleType> <!-- Definition for"launch", "smd", and "mark". 2. Replace "thatlaunch phase. Name isunique to the server" to "uniquean optional attribute used to extend theserver" in the Validator Identifier section. 3. Replaced ", including the "allocated" and "rejected" statuses" with "("allocated" and "rejected")" in the Status Values section. 4. Replaced "Is a possible end state" with "This is a possible end state" inphase type. For example, when using thedefinitionphase type value of "custom", the"allocated" and "rejected" statuses in the Status Values section. 5. Add the preamble "The transitions between the states is a matter of server policy. This diagram defines one possible set of permitted transitions.""name" can be used to specify theState Transition diagram. 6. Split the first sentencecustom phase. --> <complexType name="phaseType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:phaseTypeValue"> <attribute name="name" type="token"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- Enumeration ofthe Poll Messaging section into two sentences, onelaunch phase values --> <simpleType name="phaseTypeValue"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="sunrise"/> <enumeration value="landrush"/> <enumeration value="claims"/> <enumeration value="open"/> <enumeration value="custom"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Definition for theLaunch Application and onesunrise code --> <simpleType name="codeValue"> <restriction base="token"> <minLength value="1"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <complexType name="codeType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:codeValue"> <attribute name="validatorID" type="launch:validatorIDType" use="optional"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- Definition for theLaunch Registration. 7. Remove "either" and replace "or" with an "and" in the first sentence of the Digital Signature sectionnotice identifier --> <simpleType name="noticeIDValue"> <restriction base="token"> <minLength value="1"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <complexType name="noticeIDType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="launch:noticeIDValue"> <attribute name="validatorID" type="launch:validatorIDType" use="optional"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- Definition forclarity and to be more consistent with the description ofthe"signed mark" validation model. 5. Updates based on feedback from Ben Campbellvalidator identifier --> <simpleType name="validatorIDType"> <restriction base="token"> <minLength value="1"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Possible status values for sunrise application --> <simpleType name="statusValueType"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="pendingValidation"/> <enumeration value="validated"/> <enumeration value="invalid"/> <enumeration value="pendingAllocation"/> <enumeration value="allocated"/> <enumeration value="rejected"/> <enumeration value="custom"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Status type definition --> <complexType name="statusType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="normalizedString"> <attribute name="s" type="launch:statusValueType" use="required"/> <attribute name="lang" type="language" default="en"/> <attribute name="name" type="token"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- codeMark Type thatinclude: 1. Replacement of "that"contains an optional code with"which" in the first sentence of the Validator Identifier section not needed due change from Harald Alvestrand's feedback. 2. Avoid using RFC 2119 in the Launch Phases definitions, which resulted in change MAY to may inmark information --> <complexType name="codeMarkType"> <sequence> <element name="code" type="launch:codeType" minOccurs="0"/> <element ref="mark:abstractMark" minOccurs="0"/> </sequence> </complexType> <!-- Child elements for thedefinitioncreate command --> <complexType name="createType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <choice minOccurs="0"> <element name="codeMark" type="launch:codeMarkType" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <element ref="smd:abstractSignedMark" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <element ref="smd:encodedSignedMark" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </choice> <element name="notice" type="launch:createNoticeType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> <attribute name="type" type="launch:objectType"/> </complexType> <!-- Type ofthe "open" phase and MUST to must in the definitionlaunch object --> <simpleType name="objectType"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="application"/> <enumeration value="registration"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Child elements of the"claims" phase. 3. Change "SHOULD" to "should" in the sentence "For example, the <launch:phase>create notice elementSHOULD be <launch:phase name="landrush">claims</launch:phase>". 4. Change "MUST" to "must" in the sentence "The Trademark Claims Phase is when a Claims Notice MUST be displayed to a prospective registrant--> <complexType name="createNoticeType"> <sequence> <element name="noticeID" type="launch:noticeIDType"/> <element name="notAfter" type="dateTime"/> <element name="acceptedDate" type="dateTime"/> </sequence> </complexType> <!-- Child elements ofa domain name that matches trademarks".check (Claims Check Command) --> <complexType name="checkType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType" minOccurs="0"/> </sequence> <attribute name="type" type="launch:checkFormType" default="claims"/> </complexType> <!-- Type of check form (Claims Check or Availability Check) --> <simpleType name="checkFormType"> <restriction base="token"> <enumeration value="claims"/> <enumeration value="avail"/> <enumeration value="trademark"/> </restriction> </simpleType> <!-- Child elements of info command --> <complexType name="infoType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <element name="applicationID" type="launch:applicationIDType" minOccurs="0"/> </sequence> <attribute name="includeMark" type="boolean" default="false"/> </complexType> <!-- Child response elements --> <element name="chkData" type="launch:chkDataType"/> <element name="creData" type="launch:idContainerType"/> <element name="infData" type="launch:infDataType"/> <!-- <check> response elements --> <complexType name="chkDataType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType" minOccurs="0"/> <element name="cd" type="launch:cdType" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> </complexType> <complexType name="cdType"> <sequence> <element name="name" type="launch:cdNameType"/> <element name="claimKey" type="launch:claimKeyType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> </complexType> <complexType name="cdNameType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="eppcom:labelType"> <attribute name="exists" type="boolean" use="required"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <complexType name="claimKeyType"> <simpleContent> <extension base="token"> <attribute name="validatorID" type="launch:validatorIDType" use="optional"/> </extension> </simpleContent> </complexType> <!-- <info> response elements --> <complexType name="infDataType"> <sequence> <element name="phase" type="launch:phaseType"/> <element name="applicationID" type="launch:applicationIDType" minOccurs="0"/> <element name="status" type="launch:statusType" minOccurs="0"/> <element ref="mark:abstractMark" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence> </complexType> </schema> END 5.Change "MAY"IANA Considerations 5.1. XML Namespace This document uses URNs to"may" in the sentence "Claim Notice Information Service (CNIS), which MAY be directly linkeddescribe XML namespaces and XML schemas conforming to aTrademark Validator.", where MAY can be lowercase may". 6. Remove "that" from the sentence "The <launch:codeMark> element that is used byregistry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. IANA has registered the"code", "mark", and "code with mark" validation models,launch namespace as follows: URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0 Registrant Contact: IESG XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification. IANA has registered thefollowing child elements". 7. Addedlaunch XML schema as follows: URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:launch-1.0 Registrant Contact: IESG XML: See theconsistent use"Formal Syntax" section ofcolons ":" atthis document. 5.2. EPP Extension Registry IANA has registered theend ofEPP extension described in this document in thehangText labels to address adding whitespace between handing indent list entries. 8. Revised"Extensions for thefirst sentence,Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)" registry described in [RFC7451]. The details of thesecond paragraph,registration are as follows: Name of Extension: "Launch Phase Mapping for the"EPP <update> Command" section, to read "AnExtensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)" Document Status: Standards Track Reference: RFC 8334 Registrant Name and Email Address: IESG, <iesg@ietf.org> TLDs: Any IPR Disclosure: None Status: Active Notes: None 6. Security Considerations The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any security services beyond those described by EPP<update> command with[RFC5730], theextension sentEPP domain name mapping [RFC5731], and protocol layers used by EPP. The security considerations described in these other specifications apply toa server that does not support launch applications will fail.". 9. Revised the "The server SHOULD NOT use the "custom" status value"this specification as well. Updates to, and deletion of, an application object MUST be restricted to"The server SHOULD use one of the non-"custom" status values" in the Status Values section. 10. Revised "Bothclients authorized to perform theValidator Identifier andsaid operation on theIssuer Identifier used MUSTobject. Information contained within an application, or even the mere fact that an application exists, may beunique"confidential. Any attempt to"Both the Validator Identifier and the Issuer Identifier usedoperate on an application object by an unauthorized client MUST beunique inrejected with an EPP 2201 (authorization error) return code. Server policy may allow an <info> operation with filtered output by clients other than theserver"sponsoring client, in which case theValidator Identifier section. 11. Revised "The Validator Identifier MAY define a non-Trademark Validator<domain:infData> and <launch:infData> responses SHOULD be filtered to include only fields thatsupports a form of claims"are publicly accessible. 7. References 7.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "TheValidator Identifier may define a non-Trademark Validator that supports a form of claims, where claimsIETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. [RFC5646] Phillips, A., Ed. anda Validator Identifier can be usedM. Davis, Ed., "Tags forpurposes beyond trademarks" in the Validator Identifier section. 6. Updates based on feedback from Eric Rescoria that include: 1. Replaced the duplicate Claims Check FormIdentifying Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, DOI 10.17487/RFC5646, September 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5646>. [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>. [RFC7848] Lozano, G., "Mark andClaims Create FormSigned Mark Objects Mapping", RFC 7848, DOI 10.17487/RFC7848, June 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7848>. [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. [W3C.REC-xml11-20060816] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E., Yergeau, F., and J. Cowan, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1 (Second Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-xml11-20060816, August 2006, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml11-20060816>. 7.2. Informative References [ICANN-TMCH] Lozano, G., "ICANN TMCH functional specifications", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-03, July 2017. [RFC7451] Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for thelist of the two ways the document supports the Trademark Claims Phase, to referExtensible Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451, February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>. Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge thesection by number instead of by name. 2. Added "The useefforts of"..." is used as shorthand for elements defined outside this document" added tothe"In examples,..." paragraphleading participants of theConventions Used in This Document section. 3. Added "When using digital signatures the server MUST validate the digital signature" to the Digital Signature section. 4. Removed "post-launch"Community TMCH Model that led tothe descriptionmany of the"open" phase in the Launch Phases section. 5. Add the sentences "Multiple launch phases and multiple models are supportedchanges toenable the launch of a domain name registry. What is supportedthis document, which include Chris Wright, Jeff Neuman, Jeff Eckhaus, andwhat is validated is up to server policy. Communication of the server policy is typically performed using an out-of-band mechanismWill Shorter. Special suggestions thatis not specified inhave been incorporated into thisdocument." todocument were provided by Harald Alvestrand, Ben Campbell, Spencer Dawkins, Jothan Frakes, Keith Gaughan, Seth Goldman, Scott Hollenbeck, Michael Holloway, Jan Jansen, Rubens Kuhl, Mirja Kuhlewind, Warren Kumari, Ben Levac, Gustavo Lozano, Klaus Malorny, Alexander Mayrhofer, Alexey Melnikov, Patrick Mevzek, James Mitchell, Francisco Obispo, Mike O'Connell, Eric Rescorla, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer, Sabrina Tanamal, Trung Tran, Ulrich Wisser, and Sharon Wodjenski. Some of thesecond paragraphdescription of theIntroduction section. 7. UpdatesTrademark Claims Phase was based onfeedback from Spencer Dawkins that include: 1. Replace "during their initial launch" with "as they begin operation" intheIntroduction section. 8. Updates based on feedback from Sabrina Tanamal that include: 1. Pretty printwork done by Gustavo Lozano in theXML schema to address inconsistent indenting.ICANN TMCH functional specifications. Authors' Addresses James Gould VeriSign, Inc. 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190USUnited States of America Email: jgould@verisign.com URI:http://www.verisigninc.comhttp://www.verisign.com Wil Tan Cloud Registry Suite 32 Seabridge House 377 Kent St Sydney, NSW 2000AUAustralia Phone: +61 414 710899 Email: wil@cloudregistry.net URI: http://www.cloudregistry.net Gavin Brown CentralNic Ltd 35-39 Mooregate London, England EC2R 6ARGBUnited Kingdom Phone: +44 20 33 88 0600 Email: gavin.brown@centralnic.com URI: https://www.centralnic.com