Network Working Group J. Gould Internet-Draft VeriSign, Inc. Intended status: Standards Track K. Feher Expires: August 2, 2018 Neustar January 29, 2018 Change Poll Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) draft-ietf-regext-change-poll-07 Abstract This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extension for notifying clients of operations on client sponsored objects that were not initiated by the client through EPP. These operations may include contractual or policy requirements including but not limited to regular batch processes, customer support actions, Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) or Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) actions, court directed actions, and bulk updates based on customer requests. Since the client is not directly involved or knowledgable of these operations, the extension is used along with an EPP object mapping to provide the resulting state of the post-operation object, and optionally a pre-operation object, with the operation meta-data of what, when, who, and why. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 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 August 2, 2018. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 1] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3. Who . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.4. Dates and Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. EPP Query Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.1. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.3. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2. EPP Transform Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2.1. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2.3. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2.4. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2.5. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.1. Change Poll Extension Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5.1. XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5.2. EPP Extension Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6.1. Verisign EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 6.2. Verisign Consolidated Top Level Domain (CTLD) SRS . . . . 21 6.3. Verisign .COM / .NET SRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 6.4. Neustar EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Appendix A. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.3. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.4. Change from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 2] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 A.5. Change from 04 to 05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.6. Change from 05 to REGEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.7. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.8. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.9. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.10. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.11. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.12. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.13. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07 . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 1. Introduction This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730]. This mapping, an extension to EPP object mappings like the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731], is used to notify clients of operations they are not directly involved in, on objects that the client sponsors. It is up to server policy to determine what transform operations and clients to notify. Using this extension, clients can more easily keep their systems in-sync with the objects stored in the server. When a change occurs that a client needs to be notified of, a poll message can be inserted by the server for consumption by the client using the EPP command and response defined in [RFC5730]. The extension supports including a "before" operation poll message and an "after" operation poll message. 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 document MUST be interpreted in the character case presented in order to develop a conforming implementation. In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and white space in examples are provided only to illustrate element relationships and are not a REQUIRED feature of this protocol. "changePoll-1.0" is used as an abbreviation for "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:changePoll-1.0". The XML namespace prefix "changePoll" is used, 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. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 3] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 2. Object Attributes This extension adds additional elements to EPP object mappings like the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. Only those new elements are described here. 2.1. Operation An operation consists of any transform operation that impacts objects that the client sponsers and SHOULD be notified of. The element defines the operation. The OPTIONAL "op" attribute is an identifier, represented in the 7-bit US-ASCII character set, that is used to define a sub-operation or the name of a "custom" operation. The enumerated list of values include: "create": Create operation as defined in [RFC5730]. "delete": Delete operation as defined in [RFC5730]. If the delete operation results in an immediate purge of the object, then the "op" attribute MUST be set to "purge". "renew": Renew operation as defined in [RFC5730]. "transfer": Transfer operation as defined in [RFC5730] that MUST set the "op" attribute with one of the possible transfer type values that include "request", "approve", "cancel", or "reject". "update": Update operation as defined in [RFC5730]. "restore": Restore operation as defined in [RFC3915] that MUST set the "op" attribute with one of the possible restore type values that include "request" or "report". "autoRenew": Auto renew operation executed by the server. "autoDelete": Auto delete operation executed by the server. If the "autoDelete" operation results in an immediate purge of the object, then the "op" attribute MUST be set to "purge". "autoPurge": Auto purge operation executed by the server when removing the object after it had the "pendingDelete" status. "custom": Custom operation that MUST set the "op" attribute with the custom operation name. 2.2. State The state attribute reflects the state of the object "before" or "after" the operation. The state is defined using the OPTIONAL "state" attribute of the element, with the possible values "before" or "after" and with a default value of "after". The server MAY support both the "before" state and the "after" state of the operation, by using one poll message for the "before" state and one poll message for the "after" state. The "before" state poll message MUST be inserted prior to the "after" state poll message. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 4] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 For operations in Section 2.1 that don't have an "after" state, the server MUST use the "before" state poll message. For example, for the "delete" operation with the "op" attribute set to "purge", or the "autoPurge" operation, the server includes the state of the object prior to being purged in the "before" state poll message. For operations in Section 2.1 that don't have a "before" state, the server MUST use the "after" state poll message. For example, for the "create" operation, the server includes the state of the object after creation in the "after" state poll message. 2.3. Who The element defines who executed the operation for audit purposes. The scheme used for the possible set of element values is up to server policy. The server MAY identify the element value based on: "Identifier": Unique user identifier of the user that executed the operation. An example is "ClientX". "Name": Name of the user that executed the operation. An example is "John Doe". "Role": Role of the user that executed operation. An example is "CSR" for a Customer Support Representative or "Batch" for a server batch. 2.4. Dates and Times Date and time attribute values MUST be represented in Universal Coordinated Time (UTC) using the Gregorian calendar. The extended date-time form using upper case "T" and "Z" characters defined in [W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028] MUST be used to represent date-time values, as XML Schema does not support truncated date-time forms or lower case "T" and "Z" characters. 3. EPP Command Mapping A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found in the EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730]. 3.1. EPP Query Commands EPP provides three commands to retrieve object information: to determine if an object is known to the server, to retrieve detailed information associated with an object, and to retrieve object transfer status information. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 5] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 3.1.1. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 3.1.2. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command described in the [RFC5730]. This extension adds operation detail of EPP object mapping operations Section 2.1 to an EPP poll response, as described in [RFC5730], that is an extension of the EPP object mapping info response. Any transform operation to an object defined in an EPP object mapping, by a client other than the sponsoring client, MAY result in extending the response of the object for inserting an EPP poll message with the operation detail. The sponsoring client will then receive the state of the object with operation detail like what, who, when, and why the object was changed. The element contains the operation detail along with an indication of whether the object reflects the state before or after the operation as defined in Section 2.2. The element includes the operation detail with the following child elements: : Transform operation executed on the object as defined in Section 2.1. : Date and time when the operation was executed. : Server transaction identifier of the operation. : Who executed the operation as defined in Section 2.3. : OPTIONAL case identifer associated with the operation. The required "type" attribute defines the type of case. The OPTIONAL "name" attribute is an identifier, represented in the 7-bit US-ASCII character set, that is used to define the name of the "custom" case type. The enumerated list of case types include: udrp: a Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) case. urs: a Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) case. custom: A custom case that is defined using the "name" attribute. : OPTIONAL reason for executing the operation. If present, this element contains the server-specific text to help explain the reason the operation was executed. This text MUST be represented in the response language previously negotiated with the client; an OPTIONAL "lang" attribute MAY be Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 6] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 present to identify the language if the negotiated value is something other than the default value of "en" (English). Example poll response with the extension for a URS lock transaction on the domain.example domain name, with the "before" state. The "before" state is reflected in the block: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 7] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 S: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Registry initiated update of domain. S: S: S: S: domain.example S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: S: jd1234 S: sh8013 S: sh8013 S: ClientX S: ClientY S: 2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: 2014-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: S: S: S: S: update S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 12345-XYZ S: URS Admin S: urs123 S: URS Lock S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: Example poll response with the extension for a URS lock transaction on the domain.example domain name, with the "after" state. The "after" state is reflected in the Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 8] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 block: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 9] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 S: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Registry initiated update of domain. S: S: S: S: domain.example S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: S: S: S: jd1234 S: sh8013 S: sh8013 S: ClientX S: ClientY S: 2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: ClientZ S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 2014-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: S: S: S: S: update S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 12345-XYZ S: URS Admin S: urs123 S: URS Lock S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 10] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Example poll response with the extension for a custom "sync" operation on the domain.example domain name, with the default "after" state. The "after" state is reflected in the block: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 11] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Registry initiated Sync of Domain Expiration Date S: S: S: S: domain.example S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: S: jd1234 S: sh8013 S: sh8013 S: ClientX S: ClientY S: 2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: ClientZ S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 2014-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: S: S: S: S: custom S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 12345-XYZ S: CSR S: Customer sync request S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 12] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Example poll response with the extension for a "delete" operation on the domain.example domain name that is immediately purged, with the default "after" state. The "after" state is reflected in the block: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Registry initiated delete of S: domain resulting in immediate purge. S: S: S: S: domain.example S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: ClientX S: S: S: S: S: S: delete S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 12345-XYZ S: ClientZ S: Court order S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 13] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Example poll response with the extension for an "autoPurge" operation on the domain.example domain name that previously had the "pendingDelete" status, with the default "after" state. The "after" state is reflected in the block: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Registry purged domain with pendingDelete status. S: S: S: S: domain.example S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: ClientX S: S: S: S: S: S: autoPurge S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 12345-XYZ S: Batch S: S: Past pendingDelete 5 day period S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 14] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Example poll response with the extension for an "update" operation on the ns1.domain.example host, with the default "after" state. The "after" state is reflected in the block: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Registry initiated update of host. S: S: S: S: ns1.domain.example S: NS1_EXAMPLE1-REP S: S: S: S: 192.0.2.2 S: 1080:0:0:0:8:800:200C:417A S: ClientX S: ClientY S: 2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: ClientY S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: S: S: S: S: update S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: 12345-XYZ S: ClientZ S: Host Lock S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 15] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 3.1.3. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP query command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 3.2. EPP Transform Commands EPP provides five commands to transform objects: to create an instance of an object, to delete an instance of an object, to extend the validity period of an object, to manage object sponsorship changes, and to change information associated with an object. 3.2.1. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 3.2.2. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 3.2.3. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 3.2.4. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 3.2.5. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the [RFC5730]. 4. Formal Syntax One schema is presented here that is the EPP Change Poll Extension schema. The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representation of the object mapping suitable for automated validation of EPP XML instances. The BEGIN and END tags are not part of the schema; they are used to note the beginning and ending of the schema for URI registration purposes. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 16] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 4.1. Change Poll Extension Schema BEGIN Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0 Change Poll Mapping Schema. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 17] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 END 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. XML Namespace This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. The following URI assignment is requested of IANA: Registration request for the changePoll namespace: URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:changePoll-1.0 Registrant Contact: IESG XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification. Registration request for the changePoll XML schema: Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 19] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:changePoll-1.0 Registrant Contact: IESG XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document. 5.2. EPP Extension Registry The EPP extension described in this document should be registered by the IANA in the EPP Extension Registry described in [RFC7451]. The details of the registration are as follows: Name of Extension: "Change Poll Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)" Document status: Standards Track Reference: (insert reference to RFC version of this document) Registrant Name and Email Address: IESG, TLDs: Any IPR Disclosure: None Status: Active Notes: None 6. Implementation Status Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to RFC 6982 [RFC6982] before publication. This section records the status of known implementations of the protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 6982 [RFC6982]. The description of implementations in this section is intended 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 spent to verify the information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may exist. According to RFC 6982 [RFC6982], "this will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 20] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as they see fit". 6.1. Verisign EPP SDK Organization: Verisign Inc. Name: Verisign EPP SDK Description: The Verisign EPP SDK includes both a full client implementation and a full server stub implementation of draft-ietf- regext-change-poll. Level of maturity: Production Coverage: All aspects of the protocol are implemented. Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License Contact: jgould@verisign.com URL: https://www.verisign.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) implements the server-side of draft-ietf- regext-change-poll for a variety of Top Level Domains (TLD's). Level of maturity: Production Coverage: The "after" state poll message for an "update" transform operation of a domain name due to server policy. Licensing: Proprietary Contact: jgould@verisign.com Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 21] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 6.3. Verisign .COM / .NET SRS Organization: Verisign Inc. Name: Verisign .COM / .NET Shared Registry System (SRS) Description: The Verisign Shared Registry System (SRS) for .COM and .NET implements the server-side of draft-ietf-regext-change-poll. Level of maturity: Production Coverage: The "after" state poll message for an "update" transform operation of a domain name due to server policy. Licensing: Proprietary Contact: jgould@verisign.com 6.4. Neustar EPP SDK Organisation: Neustar Inc. Name: Neustar EPP SDK Description: The Neustar EPP SDK includes a full client implementation of draft-ietf-regext-change-poll. Level of maturity: Production Coverage: All client side aspects of the protocol are implemented. Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License Contact: kal.feher@team.neustar 7. Security Considerations The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any security services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730] and protocol layers used by EPP. The security considerations described in these other specifications apply to this specification as well. 8. Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge the original concept for this draft and the efforts in the initial versions of this draft by Trung Tran and Sharon Wodjenski. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 22] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Special suggestions that have been incorporated into this document were provided by Scott Hollenbeck, Michael Holloway, and Patrick Mevzek. 9. 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, . [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, . [RFC3915] Hollenbeck, S., "Domain Registry Grace Period Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", RFC 3915, DOI 10.17487/RFC3915, September 2004, . [RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009, . [RFC5731] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731, DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009, . [RFC6982] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section", RFC 6982, DOI 10.17487/RFC6982, July 2013, . [RFC7451] Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451, February 2015, . [W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028] Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-xmlschema-2-20041028, October 2004, . Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 23] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Appendix A. Change History A.1. Change from 00 to 01 1. Added an optional caseId element that defines the case identifier from UDRP, URS, or custom case, based on feedback from Michael Holloway. A.2. Change from 01 to 02 1. Amended XML Namespace section of IANA Considerations, added EPP Extension Registry section. 2. Moved Change History to the back section as an Appendix. A.3. Change from 02 to 03 1. Fixed "before" state example to use the "before" state value based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek. A.4. Change from 03 to 04 1. Updated the authors for the draft. A.5. Change from 04 to 05 1. Ping update. A.6. Change from 05 to REGEXT 00 1. Changed to regext working group draft by changing draft-gould- change-poll to draft-ietf-regext-change-poll. A.7. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 1. Ping update. A.8. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 1. Added the Implementation Status section. A.9. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 1. Changed Neustar author to Kal Feher. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 24] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 A.10. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 1. Added Neustar implementation to the Implementation Status section. A.11. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 1. Updates based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek, that include: 1. Added a missing comma to "Using this extension, clients" in the Introduction section. 2. Modified the description of the "transfer", "restore", and "custom" operations to include "MUST set the "op" attribute" language. 3. Rephrased the first sentence of the Who section. 4. Added references to the element in the Who section. 5. Revise the sentence that describes how the extension extends the info response in the EPP Command section. 6. Refer to EPP Object Mapping as EPP object mapping throughout the document. 7. Add a Dates and Times section to the Object Attributes section. A.12. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 1. Added the "State" sub-section to the "Object Attributes" section to describe the expected behavior for the "before" and "after" states, based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek. 2. Added a colon suffix to each hangText entry to provide better separation. A.13. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07 1. Updates based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck, that include: 1. Changed MAY to may in the Abstract. 2. Revised the "IANA Considerations" section to include the registration of the XML schema. 3. Revised the description of the "name" attribute and the "changePoll:operation> "op" attribute as containing 7-bit US-ASCII identifiers for the case type or the operation type, respectively. Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 25] Internet-Draft changePoll January 2018 Authors' Addresses James Gould VeriSign, Inc. 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 US Email: jgould@verisign.com URI: http://www.verisigninc.com Kal Feher Neustar lvl 8/10 Queens Road Melbourne, VIC 3004 AU Email: kal.feher@team.neustar URI: http://www.neustar.biz Gould & Feher Expires August 2, 2018 [Page 26]