To:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
cc:
"'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Peter Chow <peter@gmo.jp>
Date:
Fri, 23 May 2003 04:31:11 +0900 (JST)
In-Reply-To:
<5BEA6CDB196A4241B8BE129D309AA4AF10E7F6@vsvapostal8.vasrv.verisign.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-rgp-00.txt
On Thu, 22 May 2003, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: > This new I-D might be of interest to anyone having to implement ICANN's > Redemption Grace Period policy within EPP. Comments and suggestions around > the "TBD" items are welcome. Scott, in section 2 you said "(TBD: should the report be submitted through the protocol (as part of the <restore>) or an out-of-band facility such as a web site?)" I would prefer if there is a mechanism in the protocol to submit the reports. Recently VGRS started an IDN renewal period extension program that would allow registrars to have extra time to convince customers to renew IDN domains. This program required that the IDN domains first be deleted and then restored, with the restore reports being submitted via the Registrar Tool website. The amount of manual work required to submit the restore report via the website made this solution ineffective. A mechanism for us to submit the reports through the protocol would have allowed us to participate in this program. Peter