Re: [EPP-discuss] Forthcoming feature releases of the EPP service: renew

From: Rieke Poppe - One.com <rm_at_one.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:27:43 +0200

or maybe we should just realize that they will not be changing the
model, and finding the best possible solution that works within the
limitations of this model?

I'd rather spend my time discussing things that I actually have a chance
to change, instead of focusing on something that might never happen anyway.

-- 
best regards
Rieke Poppe (RM)
Domain Operations Manager, One.com
On 14/04/16 13:17, Boris Fernandez wrote:
> Again fixing this feature to the billing-c is just no sense. Why don't we focus our energy on pretending DK-Hostmaster may start working on a real Registrar program ?
>
> Why do we have to continue dealing with this NIC model of an another age.
>
> It is nice to see some effort from Jonas on the EPP, but  I do not see how that helps until that technics applies to a real registrar/reseller program...
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Sommer [mailto:ts_at_zitcom.dk]
> Sent: 14. april 2016 11:45
> To: Jonas Nielsen <jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk>
> Cc: Ashley La Bolle | EPAG Domainservices GmbH <al_at_epag.de>; Benny Samuelsen - ISPHuset Nordic AS <benny_at_isphuset.no>; Rieke Poppe - One.com <rm_at_one.com>; epp-discuss_at_liste.dk-hostmaster.dk
> Subject: RE: [EPP-discuss] Forthcoming feature releases of the EPP service: renew
>
> Actually, a colleague just presented me with a possible issue.
>
> Say a customer has an account with both UnoEuro and One.com, both set to autorenewal. Now which registrar gets to autorenew? Both do, but the one who autorenews first, wins - which might not be the correct registrar and not the one the customer actually wants to perform the renewal.
>
> So, obviously a 'good way' to figure out who can renew a domain would be preferred, and so we're back to <clID> :) The best alternative to <clID>, that I can think of, would be that billing-c and nameserver-owner could renew.
>
> // Tom
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonas Nielsen [mailto:jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk]
> Sent: 13. april 2016 15:41
> To: Tom Sommer <ts_at_zitcom.dk>
> Cc: Ashley La Bolle | EPAG Domainservices GmbH <al_at_epag.de>; Benny Samuelsen - ISPHuset Nordic AS <benny_at_isphuset.no>; Rieke Poppe - One.com <rm_at_one.com>; epp-discuss_at_liste.dk-hostmaster.dk
> Subject: Re: [EPP-discuss] Forthcoming feature releases of the EPP service: renew
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> See below:
>
>> On 13 Apr 2016, at 15:26, Tom Sommer <ts_at_zitcom.dk> wrote:
>>
>> If we are required to set ourselves as billing-c -> perform the renew -> unset ourselves as billing-c, this function becomes essentially useless to us and to our customers, it will be nothing but a headache for them and us.
>>
> Understood
>
>> We need to be able to renew a domain even if we are not billing-c, which is how EPP normally works - since the permission to renew is usually held by the <clID>, and not the billing-c. Since DKHM does not have a <clID> concept, a reasonable compromise would that any registrar can perform a renew on any domain, until a better permission-scheme is found.
>>
> Acknowledged
>
>> Since YOU are performing the EPP-RENEW command, you do not need a poll about it, if someone else performs a renew on a domain to which you are attached, or the customer/DKHM does, an epp-poll should be issued to you.
>>
> Noted
>
>> It would be nice if the procedure regarding who is billed (the registrar issuing the renewal, and not the billing-c) could be further explained in the draft, just for clarity.
>>
> I will try to outline the further processing and side-effects.
>
>> Just my thoughts.
>
> Thanks for your feedback
>
> jonasbn
>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tom Sommer (via OWA)
>> Zitcom A/S
>> From: Ashley La Bolle | EPAG Domainservices GmbH <al_at_epag.de>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 2:16 PM
>> To: Tom Sommer
>> Cc: Benny Samuelsen - ISPHuset Nordic AS; Rieke Poppe - One.com; Jonas
>> Nielsen; epp-discuss_at_liste.dk-hostmaster.dk
>> Subject: Re: [EPP-discuss] Forthcoming feature releases of the EPP
>> service: renew
>>   
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> would the billing-c be notified via EPP of the expiration date change?
>>
>> We don't troll registries for 'unexpected changes' in the expiration date so if the expiration date was just bumped forward, we would be left with a mismatch bewteen ourselves and the registry. Even worse, I would have no explanation for our customers for how this happened...
>>
>> Best,
>> Ashley
>>
>> Am 13.04.2016 um 14:08 schrieb Tom Sommer:
>>> That's not how it would work. The person doing the renew would be billed. Not the billing contact.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tom Sommer (via iPhone)
>>>
>>> On 13. apr. 2016, at 14.00, Ashley La Bolle | EPAG Domainservices GmbH <al_at_epag.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I have to agree with Benny here... I don't want to run into the situation where someone else can send a command to renew a domain but I (as the billing contact) am charged for the renewal. Because the DK automation is so asynchronous, that renewal information wouldn't be correctly registered in our system so there's a good chance we would be billed but wouldn't know to charge the client.
>>>>
>>>> It just gets very messy :)
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Ashley
>>>>
>>>> Am 13.04.2016 um 13:33 schrieb Benny Samuelsen - ISPHuset Nordic AS:
>>>>> I don't agree we do not want a situation like Joker where anyone can renew a domain.
>>>>>
>>>>> It will be a mess if the domain are not connected to a billing
>>>>> handle we can connect to our registrar somehow
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Benny Samuelsen
>>>>>
>>>>> benny_at_isphuset.no
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ISPHuset Nordic AS
>>>>> Arupsgate 18
>>>>> 3015 Drammen
>>>>>
>>>>> Tlf sentralbord +47 3226 0200
>>>>> Faks +47 3281 1355
>>>>>
>>>>> www.isphuset.no
>>>>> www.facebook.com/isphuset
>>>>> www.twitter.com/isphuset
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 13 Apr 2016, at 13:29, Rieke Poppe - One.com <rm_at_one.com>
>>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> sounds good. Only comment from here is that I think we should skip the requirement of being billing contact to do a renew command.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> best regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rieke Poppe (RM)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Domain Operations Manager, One.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13/04/16 09:17, Jonas Nielsen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are starting to work on our EPP road map shortly. As previously announced we plan to do a series of feature releases, each holding a single feature.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First feature we are looking into is renew based on the feedback provided to us by users of our EPP service.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have updated our EPP specification as a draft describing this first feature. The draft is available here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/DK-Hostmaster/epp-service-specification/tre
>>>>>>>>> e/epp_renew_domain_v1#renew-domain
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The additional drafts will be in separate branches and upon implementation the branch will be merged into the released specification.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Discussion on the feature are most welcome here on the list, you can also write directly to me, but the first will be appreciated, to keep an open discussion and getting feedback archived publicly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Spelling errors etc. can be sent to me or offered via merge request on Github.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looking forward to your feedback,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> jonasbn
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Med venlig hilsen/Best Regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jonas B. Nielsen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Development Team Leader / Team leder for Udvikling
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kalvebod Brygge 45, 3. sal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1560 København V
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tlf.      +45 33 64 60 60
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fax.:     +45 33 64 60 66
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Email:    jonasbn_at_dk-hostmaster.dk
>>>>>>>>> Homepage: https://www.dk-hostmaster.dk
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .dk Danmarks plads på Internettet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> --------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dette er en e-mail fra DK Hostmaster A/S. Denne e-mail kan
>>>>>>> indeholde
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fortrolig information, som kun er til brug for den tiltænkte modtager.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hvis du ved en fejl har modtaget denne e-mail, bedes du venligst
>>>>>>> straks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> give afsenderen besked om dette og slette e-mailen fra dit system
>>>>>>> uden
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> at offentliggøre, videresende eller tage kopi af meddelelsen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is an email from DK Hostmaster A/S. This message may contain
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> confidential information and is intended solely for the use of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> intended addressee. If you are not the intended addressee please
>>>>>>> notify
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the sender immediately and delete this e-mail from your system.
>>>>>>> You are
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not permitted to disclose, distribute or copy the information in
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> e-mail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>
Received on Thu Apr 14 2016 - 14:27:43 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Apr 14 2016 - 14:28:00 CEST