Registration Protocols Extensions (regext)
|WG||Name||Registration Protocols Extensions|
|Area||Applications and Real-Time Area (art)|
|Dependencies||Document dependency graph (SVG)|
|Jabber chat||Room address||xmpp:firstname.lastname@example.org?join|
Charter for Working Group
The Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP, Standard 69) is the
standard domain name provisioning protocol for top-level domain name
registries. To avoid many separate EPP extensions that provide
the same functions, it's important to coordinate and standardize EPP
The EPP Extensions (EPPEXT) working group completed its first goal of
creating an IANA registry of EPP extensions. The registration process
of the registry is documented in RFC7451. Extensions may be
registered for informational purposes as long as there is a published
specification that has been reviewed by a designated expert.
The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP, RFCs 7480-7484) is the
proposed standard for retrieving registration metadata from both
domain name and Regional Internet Registries. To ensure interoperable
implementations it's important to coordinate and standardize
extensions and profiles to be used by registries.
Extensions in both cases that are targeted for the Standards Track are
subject to more thorough review and open discussion within the IETF.
In addition, commonality may be discovered in related extensions,
especially EPP extensions listed on the EPP extension registry, for
which it would makes sense to merge them into a single standard
extension everybody agrees on.
The REGEXT working group is the home of the coordination effort for
standards track extensions. The selection of extensions for standards
track shall incorporate the following guidelines.
1. Proprietary documented extensions and individual submissions of
informational or experimental EPP extensions will follow the expert
review process as described in RFC7451 for inclusion in the EPP
extensions registry. These documents will not be part of the REGEXT
working group work or milestones. The working group may discuss or
advise on these documents.
2. Extensions that seek standards track status can be suggested for WG
adoption. If accepted by the working group then the development of
the standard may proceed.
3. When there are no more proposals for Standards-Track extensions,
the working group will either close or become dormant, with the
decision made in consultation with the responsible AD. The charter
will be reviewed by the end of 2017 and will be refreshed by
rechartering if there is still a reason to keep the working group
going. In any case, the mailing list will remain open and available
for the use of the expert review process as described in RFC7451.
The working group will also identify the requirements for a
registration protocol that allows a third-party service provider to
exchange information with a registry without the need of a registrar
proxy in the middle of the exchange. These requirements will be
documented in an Informational RFC.
The working group will focus initially on the backlog of EPP and RDAP
Submit for publication an informational RFC with requirements for a registration protocol for third-party DNS providers
Submit for publication "CIRA IDN EPP Extension"
Submit for publication "EPP IDN Table Mapping"
|Feb 2017||Submit for publication draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap|
Submit for publication "Allocation Token Extension for EPP"
Submit for publication "Change Poll Extension for EPP"
Submit for publication "EPP Domain Name Mapping Extension for Bundling Registration"
Submit for publication "EPP China Name Verification Mapping"
Submit for publication "Verification Code Extension for EPP"
Submit for publication "EPP Reseller Mapping"
Submit for publication "Reseller Extension for EPP"
Submit for publication "Registry Fee Extension for EPP"
Submit for publication "EPP and RDAP Status Mapping"
Submit for publication "TMCH functional specifications"
Submit for publication "Launch Phase Mapping for EPP"