From 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Voss Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:54:24 +0100 Subject: doc: Add RFC documents --- doc/rfc/rfc5733.txt | 2299 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 2299 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/rfc/rfc5733.txt (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc5733.txt') diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc5733.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc5733.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bba3fc4 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc5733.txt @@ -0,0 +1,2299 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group S. Hollenbeck +Request for Comments: 5733 VeriSign, Inc. +STD: 69 August 2009 +Obsoletes: 4933 +Category: Standards Track + + + Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Contact Mapping + +Abstract + + This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) + mapping for the provisioning and management of individual or + organizational social information identifiers (known as "contacts") + stored in a shared central repository. Specified in Extensible + Markup Language (XML), the mapping defines EPP command syntax and + semantics as applied to contacts. This document obsoletes RFC 4933. + +Status of This Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of + publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). + Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights + and restrictions with respect to this document. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction ....................................................3 + 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................3 + 2. Object Attributes ...............................................3 + 2.1. Contact and Client Identifiers .............................3 + 2.2. Status Values ..............................................4 + 2.3. Individual and Organizational Names ........................5 + 2.4. Address ....................................................6 + 2.4.1. Street, City, and State or Province .................6 + 2.4.2. Postal Code .........................................6 + 2.4.3. Country .............................................6 + 2.5. Telephone Numbers ..........................................6 + 2.6. Email Addresses ............................................6 + 2.7. Dates and Times ............................................6 + 2.8. Authorization Information ..................................7 + 2.9. Disclosure of Data Elements and Attributes .................7 + 3. EPP Command Mapping .............................................8 + 3.1. EPP Query Commands .........................................8 + 3.1.1. EPP Command .................................9 + 3.1.2. EPP Command .................................11 + 3.1.3. EPP Query Command .......................14 + 3.2. EPP Transform Commands ....................................16 + 3.2.1. EPP Command ...............................17 + 3.2.2. EPP Command ...............................20 + 3.2.3. EPP Command ................................21 + 3.2.4. EPP Command .............................21 + 3.2.5. EPP Command ...............................23 + 3.3. Offline Review of Requested Actions .......................26 + 4. Formal Syntax ..................................................28 + 5. Internationalization Considerations ............................37 + 6. IANA Considerations ............................................37 + 7. Security Considerations ........................................38 + 8. Acknowledgements ...............................................38 + 9. References .....................................................39 + 9.1. Normative References ......................................39 + 9.2. Informative References ....................................40 + Appendix A. Changes from RFC 4933 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +1. Introduction + + This document describes a personal and organizational identifier + mapping for version 1.0 of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol + (EPP). This mapping is specified using the Extensible Markup + Language (XML) 1.0 as described in [W3C.REC-xml-20040204] and XML + Schema notation as described in [W3C.REC-xmlschema-1-20041028] and + [W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028]. This document obsoletes RFC 4933 + [RFC4933]. + + [RFC5730] provides a complete description of EPP command and response + structures. A thorough understanding of the base protocol + specification is necessary to understand the mapping described in + this document. + + XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications + and examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in the + character case presented to develop a conforming implementation. + +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 [RFC2119]. + + 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. + +2. Object Attributes + + An EPP contact object has attributes and associated values that can + be viewed and modified by the sponsoring client or the server. This + section describes each attribute type in detail. The formal syntax + for the attribute values described here can be found in the "Formal + Syntax" section of this document and in the appropriate normative + references. + +2.1. Contact and Client Identifiers + + All EPP contacts are identified by a server-unique identifier. + Contact identifiers are character strings with a specified minimum + length, a specified maximum length, and a specified format. Contact + identifiers use the "clIDType" client identifier syntax described in + [RFC5730]. + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +2.2. Status Values + + A contact object MUST always have at least one associated status + value. Status values can be set only by the client that sponsors a + contact object and by the server on which the object resides. A + client can change the status of a contact object using the EPP + command. Each status value MAY be accompanied by a string + of human-readable text that describes the rationale for the status + applied to the object. + + A client MUST NOT alter status values set by the server. A server + MAY alter or override status values set by a client, subject to local + server policies. The status of an object MAY change as a result of + either a client-initiated transform command or an action performed by + a server operator. + + Status values that can be added or removed by a client are prefixed + with "client". Corresponding status values that can be added or + removed by a server are prefixed with "server". Status values that + do not begin with either "client" or "server" are server-managed. + + Status Value Descriptions: + + - clientDeleteProhibited, serverDeleteProhibited + + Requests to delete the object MUST be rejected. + + - clientTransferProhibited, serverTransferProhibited + + Requests to transfer the object MUST be rejected. + + - clientUpdateProhibited, serverUpdateProhibited + + Requests to update the object (other than to remove this status) + MUST be rejected. + + - linked + + The contact object has at least one active association with + another object, such as a domain object. Servers SHOULD provide + services to determine existing object associations. + + - ok + + This is the normal status value for an object that has no pending + operations or prohibitions. This value is set and removed by the + server as other status values are added or removed. + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + - pendingCreate, pendingDelete, pendingTransfer, pendingUpdate + + A transform command has been processed for the object, but the + action has not been completed by the server. Server operators can + delay action completion for a variety of reasons, such as to allow + for human review or third-party action. A transform command that + is processed, but whose requested action is pending, is noted with + response code 1001. + + When the requested action has been completed, the pendingCreate, + pendingDelete, pendingTransfer, or pendingUpdate status value MUST be + removed. All clients involved in the transaction MUST be notified + using a service message that the action has been completed and that + the status of the object has changed. + + "ok" status MAY only be combined with "linked" status. + + "linked" status MAY be combined with any status. + + "pendingDelete" status MUST NOT be combined with either + "clientDeleteProhibited" or "serverDeleteProhibited" status. + + "pendingTransfer" status MUST NOT be combined with either + "clientTransferProhibited" or "serverTransferProhibited" status. + "pendingUpdate" status MUST NOT be combined with either + "clientUpdateProhibited" or "serverUpdateProhibited" status. + + The pendingCreate, pendingDelete, pendingTransfer, and pendingUpdate + status values MUST NOT be combined with each other. + + Other status combinations not expressly prohibited MAY be used. + +2.3. Individual and Organizational Names + + Individual and organizational names associated with a contact are + represented using character strings. These strings have a specified + minimum length and a specified maximum length. Individual and + organizational names MAY be provided in either UTF-8 [RFC3629] or a + subset of UTF-8 that can be represented in 7-bit ASCII, depending on + local needs. + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +2.4. Address + + Every contact has associated postal-address information. A postal + address contains OPTIONAL street information, city information, + OPTIONAL state/province information, an OPTIONAL postal code, and a + country identifier. Address information MAY be provided in either + UTF-8 or a subset of UTF-8 that can be represented in 7-bit ASCII, + depending on local needs. + +2.4.1. Street, City, and State or Province + + Contact street, city, and state or province information is + represented using character strings. These strings have a specified + minimum length and a specified maximum length. + +2.4.2. Postal Code + + Contact postal codes are represented using character strings. These + strings have a specified minimum length and a specified maximum + length. + +2.4.3. Country + + Contact country identifiers are represented using two-character + identifiers specified in [ISO3166-1]. + +2.5. Telephone Numbers + + Contact telephone number structure is derived from structures defined + in [ITU.E164.2005]. Telephone numbers described in this mapping are + character strings that MUST begin with a plus sign ("+", ASCII value + 0x002B), followed by a country code defined in [ITU.E164.2005], + followed by a dot (".", ASCII value 0x002E), followed by a sequence + of digits representing the telephone number. An optional "x" + attribute is provided to note telephone extension information. + +2.6. Email Addresses + + Email address syntax is defined in [RFC5322]. This mapping does not + prescribe minimum or maximum lengths for character strings used to + represent email addresses. + +2.7. 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 + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + [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. + +2.8. Authorization Information + + Authorization information is associated with contact objects to + facilitate transfer operations. Authorization information is + assigned when a contact object is created, and it might be updated in + the future. This specification describes password-based + authorization information, though other mechanisms are possible. + +2.9. Disclosure of Data Elements and Attributes + + The EPP core protocol requires a server operator to announce data- + collection policies to clients; see Section 2.4 of [RFC5730]. In + conjunction with this disclosure requirement, this mapping includes + data elements that allow a client to identify elements that require + exceptional server-operator handling to allow or restrict disclosure + to third parties. + + A server operator announces a default disclosure policy when + establishing a session with a client. When an object is created or + updated, the client can specify contact attributes that require + exceptional disclosure handling using an OPTIONAL + element. Once set, disclosure preferences can be reviewed using a + contact-information query. A server operator MUST reject any + transaction that requests disclosure practices that do not conform to + the announced data-collection policy with a 2308 error response code. + + If present, the element MUST contain a "flag" + attribute. The "flag" attribute contains an XML Schema boolean + value. A value of "true" or "1" (one) notes a client preference to + allow disclosure of the specified elements as an exception to the + stated data-collection policy. A value of "false" or "0" (zero) + notes a client preference to not allow disclosure of the specified + elements as an exception to the stated data-collection policy. + + The element MUST contain at least one of the + following child elements: + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 7] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + Example element, flag="0": + + + + + + + In this example, the contact email address and voice telephone number + cannot be disclosed. All other elements are subject to disclosure in + accordance with the server's data-collection policy. + + Example element, flag="1": + + + + + + + + In this example, the internationalized contact name, organization, + and address information can be disclosed. All other elements are + subject to disclosure in accordance with the server's data-collection + policy. + + Client-identification features provided by the EPP command + and contact-authorization information are used to determine if a + client is authorized to perform contact-information query commands. + These features also determine if a client is authorized to receive + data that is otherwise marked for non-disclosure in a query response. + +3. EPP Command Mapping + + A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found + in [RFC5730]. The command mappings described here are specifically + for use in provisioning and managing contact objects via EPP. + +3.1. EPP Query Commands + + EPP provides three commands to retrieve contact information: + to determine if a contact object can be provisioned within a + repository, to retrieve detailed information associated with a + contact object, and to retrieve information regarding the + transfer status of the contact object. + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 8] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +3.1.1. EPP Command + + The EPP command is used to determine if an object can be + provisioned within a repository. It provides a hint that allows a + client to anticipate the success or failure of provisioning an object + using the command, as object-provisioning requirements are + ultimately a matter of server policy. + + In addition to the standard EPP command elements, the command + MUST contain a element that identifies the contact + namespace. The element contains the following child + elements: + + - One or more elements that contain the server-unique + identifier of the contact objects to be queried. + + Example command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: sah8013 + C: 8013sah + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + When a command has been processed successfully, the EPP + element MUST contain a child element that + identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains one or more elements that contain the following + child elements: + + - A element that identifies the queried object. This + element MUST contain an "avail" attribute whose value indicates + object availability (can it be provisioned or not) at the moment + the command was completed. A value of "1" or "true" means + that the object can be provisioned. A value of "0" or "false" + means that the object cannot be provisioned. + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 9] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + - An OPTIONAL element that MAY be provided when an + object cannot be provisioned. If present, this element contains + server-specific text to help explain why the object cannot be + provisioned. This text MUST be represented in the response + language previously negotiated with the client; an OPTIONAL "lang" + attribute MAY be present to identify the language if the + negotiated value is something other than the default value of "en" + (English). + + Example response: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + S: + S: + S: sah8013 + S: In use + S: + S: + S: 8013sah + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54322-XYZ + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if a command cannot be + processed for any reason. + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 10] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +3.1.2. EPP Command + + The EPP command is used to retrieve information associated + with a contact object. In addition to the standard EPP command + elements, the command MUST contain a element + that identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object to be queried. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains authorization + information associated with the contact object. If this element + is not provided or if the authorization information is invalid, + server policy determines if the command is rejected or if response + information will be returned to the client. + + Example command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: + C: 2fooBAR + C: + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + When an command has been processed successfully, the EPP + element MUST contain a child element that + identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object. + + - A element that contains the Repository Object + IDentifier assigned to the contact object when the object was + created. + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 11] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + - One or more elements that describe the status of + the contact object. + + - One or two elements that contain postal- + address information. Two elements are provided so that address + information can be provided in both internationalized and + localized forms; a "type" attribute is used to identify the two + forms. If an internationalized form (type="int") is provided, + element content MUST be represented in a subset of UTF-8 that can + be represented in the 7-bit US-ASCII character set. If a + localized form (type="loc") is provided, element content MAY be + represented in unrestricted UTF-8. The + element contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the name of the + individual or role represented by the contact. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the name of the + organization with which the contact is affiliated. + + - A element that contains address information + associated with the contact. A element contains + the following child elements: + + - One, two, or three OPTIONAL elements that + contain the contact's street address. + + - A element that contains the contact's city. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + state or province. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + postal code. + + - A element that contains the contact's country + code. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + voice telephone number. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + facsimile telephone number. + + - A element that contains the contact's email + address. + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 12] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + - A element that contains the identifier of the + sponsoring client. + + - A element that contains the identifier of the + client that created the contact object. + + - A element that contains the date and time of + contact-object creation. + + - A element that contains the identifier of the + client that last updated the contact object. This element MUST + NOT be present if the contact has never been modified. + + - A element that contains the date and time of the + most recent contact-object modification. This element MUST NOT be + present if the contact object has never been modified. + + - A element that contains the date and time of the + most recent successful contact-object transfer. This element MUST + NOT be provided if the contact object has never been transferred. + + - A element that contains authorization + information associated with the contact object. This element MUST + NOT be provided if the querying client is not the current + sponsoring client. + + - An OPTIONAL element that identifies elements + that require exceptional server-operator handling to allow or + restrict disclosure to third parties. See Section 2.9 for a + description of the child elements contained within the element. + + Example response for an authorized client: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + S: SH8013-REP + S: + S: + S: + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 13] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + S: John Doe + S: Example Inc. + S: + S: 123 Example Dr. + S: Suite 100 + S: Dulles + S: VA + S: 20166-6503 + S: US + S: + S: + S: +1.7035555555 + S: +1.7035555556 + S: jdoe@example.com + S: ClientY + S: ClientX + S: 1999-04-03T22:00:00.0Z + S: ClientX + S: 1999-12-03T09:00:00.0Z + S: 2000-04-08T09:00:00.0Z + S: + S: 2fooBAR + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54322-XYZ + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if an command cannot be + processed for any reason. + +3.1.3. EPP Query Command + + The EPP command provides a query operation that allows a + client to determine the real-time status of pending and completed + transfer requests. In addition to the standard EPP command elements, + the command MUST contain an "op" attribute with value + "query", and a element that identifies the contact + namespace. The element MUST contain the following + child elements: + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 14] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object to be queried. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains authorization + information associated with the contact object. If this element + is not provided or if the authorization information is invalid, + server policy determines if the command is rejected or if response + information will be returned to the client. + + Example query command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: + C: 2fooBAR + C: + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + When a query command has been processed successfully, the + EPP element MUST contain a child element + that identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + for the queried contact. + + - A element that contains the state of the most + recent transfer request. + + - A element that contains the identifier of the + client that requested the object transfer. + + - A element that contains the date and time that + the transfer was requested. + + - A element that contains the identifier of the + client that SHOULD act upon a PENDING transfer request. For all + other status types, the value identifies the client that took the + indicated action. + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 15] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + - A element that contains the date and time of a + required or completed response. For a pending request, the value + identifies the date and time by which a response is required + before an automated response action SHOULD be taken by the server. + For all other status types, the value identifies the date and time + when the request was completed. + + Example query response: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + S: pending + S: ClientX + S: 2000-06-06T22:00:00.0Z + S: ClientY + S: 2000-06-11T22:00:00.0Z + S: + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54322-XYZ + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if a query command + cannot be processed for any reason. + +3.2. EPP Transform Commands + + EPP provides four commands to transform contact-object information: + to create an instance of a contact object, to + delete an instance of a contact object, to manage contact- + object sponsorship changes, and to change information + associated with a contact object. This document does not define a + mapping for the EPP command. + + Transform commands are typically processed and completed in real + time. Server operators MAY receive and process transform commands + but defer completing the requested action if human or third-party + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 16] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + review is required before the requested action can be completed. In + such situations, the server MUST return a 1001 response code to the + client to note that the command has been received and processed but + that the requested action is pending. The server MUST also manage + the status of the object that is the subject of the command to + reflect the initiation and completion of the requested action. Once + the action has been completed, all clients involved in the + transaction MUST be notified using a service message that the action + has been completed and that the status of the object has changed. + Other notification methods MAY be used in addition to the required + service message. + + Server operators SHOULD confirm that a client is authorized to + perform a transform command on a given object. Any attempt to + transform an object by an unauthorized client MUST be rejected, and + the server MUST return a 2201 response code to the client to note + that the client lacks privileges to execute the requested command. + +3.2.1. EPP Command + + The EPP command provides a transform operation that allows a + client to create a contact object. In addition to the standard EPP + command elements, the command MUST contain a element that identifies the contact namespace. The element contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the desired server-unique + identifier for the contact to be created. + + - One or two elements that contain postal- + address information. Two elements are provided so that address + information can be provided in both internationalized and + localized forms; a "type" attribute is used to identify the two + forms. If an internationalized form (type="int") is provided, + element content MUST be represented in a subset of UTF-8 that can + be represented in the 7-bit US-ASCII character set. If a + localized form (type="loc") is provided, element content MAY be + represented in unrestricted UTF-8. The + element contains the following child elements: + + o A element that contains the name of the + individual or role represented by the contact. + + o An OPTIONAL element that contains the name of the + organization with which the contact is affiliated. + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 17] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + o A element that contains address information + associated with the contact. A element contains + the following child elements: + + * One, two, or three OPTIONAL elements that + contain the contact's street address. + + * A element that contains the contact's city. + + * An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + state or province. + + * An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + postal code. + + * A element that contains the contact's country + code. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + voice telephone number. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + facsimile telephone number. + + - A element that contains the contact's email + address. + + - A element that contains authorization + information to be associated with the contact object. This + mapping includes a password-based authentication mechanism, but + the schema allows new mechanisms to be defined in new schemas. + + - An OPTIONAL element that allows a client to + identify elements that require exceptional server-operator + handling to allow or restrict disclosure to third parties. See + Section 2.9 for a description of the child elements contained + within the element. + + Example command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 18] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + C: John Doe + C: Example Inc. + C: + C: 123 Example Dr. + C: Suite 100 + C: Dulles + C: VA + C: 20166-6503 + C: US + C: + C: + C: +1.7035555555 + C: +1.7035555556 + C: jdoe@example.com + C: + C: 2fooBAR + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + When a command has been processed successfully, the EPP + element MUST contain a child element that + identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + for the created contact. + + - A element that contains the date and time of + contact-object creation. + + Example response: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + S: 1999-04-03T22:00:00.0Z + S: + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54321-XYZ + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if a command cannot + be processed for any reason. + +3.2.2. EPP Command + + The EPP command provides a transform operation that allows a + client to delete a contact object. In addition to the standard EPP + command elements, the command MUST contain a element that identifies the contact namespace. The element MUST contain the following child element: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object to be deleted. + + A contact object SHOULD NOT be deleted if it is associated with other + known objects. An associated contact SHOULD NOT be deleted until + associations with other known objects have been broken. A server + SHOULD notify clients that object relationships exist by sending a + 2305 error response code when a command is attempted and + fails due to existing object relationships. + + Example command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 20] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + When a command has been processed successfully, a server + MUST respond with an EPP response with no element. + + Example response: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54321-XYZ + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if a command cannot + be processed for any reason. + +3.2.3. EPP Command + + Renewal semantics do not apply to contact objects, so there is no + mapping defined for the EPP command. + +3.2.4. EPP Command + + The EPP command provides a transform operation that allows + a client to manage requests to transfer the sponsorship of a contact + object. In addition to the standard EPP command elements, the + command MUST contain a element that + identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object for which a transfer request is to be + created, approved, rejected, or cancelled. + + - A element that contains authorization + information associated with the contact object. + + Every EPP command MUST contain an "op" attribute that + identifies the transfer operation to be performed, as defined in + [RFC5730]. + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 21] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + Example request command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: + C: 2fooBAR + C: + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + When a command has been processed successfully, the EPP + element MUST contain a child element that + identifies the contact namespace. The element + contains the same child elements defined for a query + response. + + Example response: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully; action pending + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + S: pending + S: ClientX + S: 2000-06-08T22:00:00.0Z + S: ClientY + S: 2000-06-13T22:00:00.0Z + S: + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54322-XYZ + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 22] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if a command cannot + be processed for any reason. + +3.2.5. EPP Command + + The EPP command provides a transform operation that allows a + client to modify the attributes of a contact object. In addition to + the standard EPP command elements, the command MUST contain + a element that identifies the contact namespace. + The element contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object to be updated. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains attribute values + to be added to the object. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains attribute values + to be removed from the object. + + - An OPTIONAL element that contains object attribute + values to be changed. + + At least one , , or element + MUST be provided if the command is not being extended. All of these + elements MAY be omitted if an extension is present. The + and elements contain the following child + elements: + + - One or more elements that contain status values + to be associated with or removed from the object. When specifying + a value to be removed, only the attribute value is significant; + element text is not required to match a value for removal. + + A element contains the following OPTIONAL child + elements. At least one child element MUST be present: + + - One or two elements that contain postal- + address information. Two elements are provided so that address + information can be provided in both internationalized and + localized forms; a "type" attribute is used to identify the two + forms. If an internationalized form (type="int") is provided, + element content MUST be represented in a subset of UTF-8 that can + be represented in the 7-bit US-ASCII character set. If a + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 23] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + localized form (type="loc") is provided, element content MAY be + represented in unrestricted UTF-8. The + element contains the following OPTIONAL child elements: + + o A element that contains the name of the + individual or role represented by the contact. + + o A element that contains the name of the + organization with which the contact is affiliated. + + o A element that contains address information + associated with the contact. A element contains + the following child elements: + + * One, two, or three OPTIONAL elements that + contain the contact's street address. + + * A element that contains the contact's city. + + * An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + state or province. + + * An OPTIONAL element that contains the contact's + postal code. + + * A element that contains the contact's country + code. + + - A element that contains the contact's voice + telephone number. + + - A element that contains the contact's facsimile + telephone number. + + - A element that contains the contact's email + address. + + - A element that contains authorization + information associated with the contact object. This mapping + includes a password-based authentication mechanism, but the schema + allows new mechanisms to be defined in new schemas. + + - A element that allows a client to identify + elements that require exceptional server-operator handling to + allow or restrict disclosure to third parties. See Section 2.9 + for a description of the child elements contained within the + element. + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 24] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + Example command: + + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: sh8013 + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: 124 Example Dr. + C: Suite 200 + C: Dulles + C: VA + C: 20166-6503 + C: US + C: + C: + C: +1.7034444444 + C: + C: + C: 2fooBAR + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: + C: ABC-12345 + C: + C: + + When an command has been processed successfully, a server + MUST respond with an EPP response with no element. + + Example response: + + S: + S: + S: + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 25] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + S: + S: Command completed successfully + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54321-XYZ + S: + S: + S: + + An EPP error response MUST be returned if an command cannot + be processed for any reason. + +3.3. Offline Review of Requested Actions + + Commands are processed by a server in the order they are received + from a client. Though an immediate response confirming receipt and + processing of the command is produced by the server, a server + operator MAY perform an offline review of requested transform + commands before completing the requested action. In such situations, + the response from the server MUST clearly note that the transform + command has been received and processed but that the requested action + is pending. The status of the corresponding object MUST clearly + reflect processing of the pending action. The server MUST notify the + client when offline processing of the action has been completed. + + Examples describing a command that requires offline review + are included here. Note the result code and message returned in + response to the command. + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully; action pending + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + S: 1999-04-03T22:00:00.0Z + S: + S: + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54321-XYZ + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 26] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + S: + S: + S: + + The status of the contact object after returning this response MUST + include "pendingCreate". The server operator reviews the request + offline and informs the client of the outcome of the review either by + queuing a service message for retrieval via the command or by + using an out-of-band mechanism to inform the client of the request. + + The service message MUST contain text that describes the notification + in the child element of the response element. In + addition, the EPP element MUST contain a child element that identifies the contact namespace. The + element contains the following child elements: + + - A element that contains the server-unique identifier + of the contact object. The element contains a + REQUIRED "paResult" attribute. A positive boolean value indicates + that the request has been approved and completed. A negative + boolean value indicates that the request has been denied and the + requested action has not been taken. + + - A element that contains the client transaction + identifier and server transaction identifier returned with the + original response to process the command. The client transaction + identifier is OPTIONAL and will only be returned if the client + provided an identifier with the original command. + + - A element that contains the date and time + describing when review of the requested action was completed. + + Example "review completed" service message: + + S: + S: + S: + S: + S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue + S: + S: + S: 1999-04-04T22:01:00.0Z + S: Pending action completed successfully. + S: + S: + S: + S: sh8013 + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 27] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + S: + S: ABC-12345 + S: 54321-XYZ + S: + S: 1999-04-04T22:00:00.0Z + S: + S: + S: + S: BCD-23456 + S: 65432-WXY + S: + S: + S: + +4. Formal Syntax + + An EPP object mapping is specified in XML Schema notation. 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. + + Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors + of the code. All rights reserved. + + Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without + modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions + are met: + + o Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright + notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. + + o Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright + notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in + the documentation and/or other materials provided with the + distribution. + + o Neither the name of Internet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, nor the + names 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, + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 28] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + 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 + + + + + + + + + + + Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0 + contact provisioning schema. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 29] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 30] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 32] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 33] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 34] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 35] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 36] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + + + + + + + + + + END + +5. Internationalization Considerations + + EPP is represented in XML, which provides native support for encoding + information using the Unicode character set and its more compact + representations including UTF-8. Conformant XML processors recognize + both UTF-8 and UTF-16 [RFC2781]. Though XML includes provisions to + identify and use other character encodings through use of an + "encoding" attribute in an declaration, use of UTF-8 is + RECOMMENDED in environments where parser encoding support + incompatibility exists. + + All date-time values presented via EPP MUST be expressed in Universal + Coordinated Time using the Gregorian calendar. The XML Schema allows + use of time zone identifiers to indicate offsets from the zero + meridian, but this option MUST NOT be used with EPP. 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 the XML Schema does not support truncated date-time forms + or lower case "T" and "Z" characters. + + Humans, organizations, and other entities often need to represent + social information in both a commonly understood character set and a + locally optimized character set. This specification provides + features allowing representation of social information in both a + subset of UTF-8 for broad readability and unrestricted UTF-8 for + local optimization. + +6. IANA Considerations + + This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas + conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688]. Two URI + assignments have been registered by the IANA. + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 37] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + Registration request for the contact namespace: + + URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:contact-1.0 + + Registrant Contact: See the "Author's Address" section of this + document. + + XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification. + + Registration request for the contact XML schema: + + URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:contact-1.0 + + Registrant Contact: See the "Author's Address" section of this + document. + + XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document. + +7. Security Considerations + + Authorization information as described in Section 2.8 is REQUIRED to + create a contact object. This information is used in some query and + transfer operations as an additional means of determining client + authorization to perform the command. Failure to protect + authorization information from inadvertent disclosure can result in + unauthorized transfer operations and unauthorized information + release. Both client and server MUST ensure that authorization + information is stored and exchanged with high-grade encryption + mechanisms to provide privacy services. + + The object mapping described in this document does not provide any + other security services or introduce any additional considerations + beyond those described by [RFC5730] or those caused by the protocol + layers used by EPP. + +8. Acknowledgements + + RFC 3733 is a product of the PROVREG working group, which suggested + improvements and provided many invaluable comments. The author + wishes to acknowledge the efforts of WG chairs Edward Lewis and Jaap + Akkerhuis for their process and editorial contributions. RFC 4933 + and this document are individual submissions, based on the work done + in RFC 3733. + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 38] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + Specific suggestions that have been incorporated into this document + were provided by Chris Bason, Eric Brunner-Williams, Jordyn Buchanan, + Robert Burbidge, Dave Crocker, Ayesha Damaraju, Anthony Eden, Sheer + El-Showk, Dipankar Ghosh, Klaus Malorny, Dan Manley, Michael + Mealling, Patrick Mevzek, Asbjorn Steira, and Rick Wesson. + +9. References + +9.1. Normative References + + [ISO3166-1] + International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for + the representation of names of countries and their + subdivisions -- Part 1: Country codes", ISO Standard 3166, + November 2006. + + [ITU.E164.2005] + International Telecommunication Union, "The international + public telecommunication numbering plan", ITU- + T Recommendation E.164, February 2005. + + [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate + Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + + [RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO + 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003. + + [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, + January 2004. + + [RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322, + October 2008. + + [RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", + STD 69, RFC 5730, August 2009. + + [W3C.REC-xml-20040204] + Sperberg-McQueen, C., Maler, E., Yergeau, F., Paoli, J., + and T. Bray, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Third + Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium FirstEdition REC-xml- + 20040204, February 2004, + . + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 39] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + + [W3C.REC-xmlschema-1-20041028] + Maloney, M., Thompson, H., Mendelsohn, N., and D. Beech, + "XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition", World Wide + Web Consortium Recommendation REC-xmlschema-1-20041028, + October 2004, + . + + [W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028] + Malhotra, A. and P. Biron, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes + Second Edition", World Wide Web Consortium + Recommendation REC-xmlschema-2-20041028, October 2004, + . + +9.2. Informative References + + [RFC2781] Hoffman, P. and F. Yergeau, "UTF-16, an encoding of ISO + 10646", RFC 2781, February 2000. + + [RFC4933] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) + Contact Mapping", RFC 4933, May 2007. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 40] + +RFC 5733 EPP Contact Mapping August 2009 + + +Appendix A. Changes from RFC 4933 + + 1. Changed "This document obsoletes RFC 3733" to "This document + obsoletes RFC 4933". + + 2. Replaced references to RFC 0822 with references to 5322. + + 3. Replaced references to RFC 3733 with references to 4933. + + 4. Replaced references to RFC 4930 with references to 5730. + + 5. Updated reference to ISO 3166-1. + + 6. Removed pendingRenew status from Section 2.2 because this + document does not define a mapping for the EPP command. + + 7. Modified text in Section 3.2.2 to include 2305 response code. + + 8. Updated Section 5. + + 9. Added "Other notification methods MAY be used in addition to the + required service message" in Section 3.2. + + 10. Added 2201 response code text in Section 3.2. + + 11. Added BSD license text to XML schema section. + +Author's Address + + Scott Hollenbeck + VeriSign, Inc. + 21345 Ridgetop Circle + Dulles, VA 20166-6503 + US + + EMail: shollenbeck@verisign.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Hollenbeck Standards Track [Page 41] + -- cgit v1.2.3