Tech-invite3GPPspecsGlossariesIETFRFCsGroupsSIPABNFsWorld Map

RFC 8334

Proposed STD
Pages: 58
Top     in Index     Prev     Next
in Group Index     Prev in Group     No Next: Highest Number in Group     Group: REGEXT

Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)

Part 1 of 3, p. 1 to 16
None       Next Section

 


Top       ToC       Page 1 
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          J. Gould
Request for Comments: 8334                                VeriSign, Inc.
Category: Standards Track                                         W. Tan
ISSN: 2070-1721                                           Cloud Registry
                                                                G. Brown
                                                          CentralNic Ltd
                                                              March 2018


  Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)

Abstract

   This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
   extension mapping for the provisioning and management of domain name
   registrations and applications during the launch of a domain name
   registry.

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8334.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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
   (https://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.

Top       Page 2 
Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Application Identifier  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Validator Identifier  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.3.  Launch Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.3.1.  Trademark Claims Phase  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.4.  Status Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       2.4.1.  State Transition  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     2.5.  Poll Messaging  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     2.6.  Mark Validation Models  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       2.6.1.  <launch:codeMark> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       2.6.2.  <mark:mark> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
       2.6.3.  Digital Signature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
         2.6.3.1.  <smd:signedMark> Element  . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
         2.6.3.2.  <smd:encodedSignedMark> Element . . . . . . . . .  16
   3.  EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     3.1.  EPP <check> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       3.1.1.  Claims Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       3.1.2.  Availability Check Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
       3.1.3.  Trademark Check Form  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     3.2.  EPP <info> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     3.3.  EPP <create> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
       3.3.1.  Sunrise Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
       3.3.2.  Claims Create Form  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
       3.3.3.  General Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  39
       3.3.4.  Mixed Create Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  40
       3.3.5.  Create Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
     3.4.  EPP <update> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  43
     3.5.  EPP <delete> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  44
     3.6.  EPP <renew> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
     3.7.  EPP <transfer> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
   4.  Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
     4.1.  Launch Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
     5.1.  XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
     5.2.  EPP Extension Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  55
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  55
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  57
   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  57
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  58

Top      ToC       Page 3 
1.  Introduction

   This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the
   Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730].  This EPP mapping
   specifies a flexible schema that can be used to implement several
   common use cases related to the provisioning and management of domain
   name registrations and applications during the launch of a domain
   name registry.

   It is typical for domain registries to operate in special modes as
   they begin operation to facilitate allocation of domain names, often
   according to special rules.  This document uses the term "launch
   phase" and the shorter form "launch" to refer to such a period.
   Multiple launch phases and multiple models are supported to enable
   the launch of a domain name registry.  Server policy determines what
   is supported and validated.  Communication of the server policy is
   typically performed using an out-of-band mechanism that is not
   specified in this document.

   The EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] is designed for the steady-
   state operation of a registry.  During a launch period, the model in
   place may be different from what is defined in the EPP domain name
   mapping [RFC5731].  For example, registries often accept multiple
   applications for the same domain name during the "sunrise" launch
   phase, referred to as a Launch Application.  A Launch Registration
   refers to a registration made during a launch phase when the server
   uses a "first-come, first-served" model.  Even in a "first-come,
   first-served" model, additional steps and information might be
   required, such as trademark information.  In addition, RFC 7848
   [RFC7848] defines a registry interface for the Trademark Claims or
   "claims" launch phase that includes support for presenting a
   Trademark Claims Notice to the registrant.  This document proposes an
   extension to the domain name mapping in order to provide a uniform
   interface for the management of Launch Applications and Launch
   Registrations in launch phases.

1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

   XML [W3C.REC-xml11-20060816] 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.

Top      ToC       Page 4 
   In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:"
   represents lines returned by a protocol server.  Indentation and
   whitespace in examples are provided only to illustrate element
   relationships and are not a REQUIRED feature of this protocol.  The
   use of "..." is used as shorthand for elements defined outside this
   document.

   A Launch Registration is a domain name registration during a launch
   phase when the server uses a "first-come, first-served" model.  Only
   a single registration for a domain name can exist in the server at a
   time.

   A Launch Application represents the intent to register a domain name
   during a launch phase when the server accepts multiple applications
   for a domain name, and the server later selects one of the
   applications to allocate as a registration.  Many Launch Applications
   for a domain name can exist in the server at a time.

   The XML namespace prefix "launch" is used for the namespace
   "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0", 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.

   The XML namespace prefix "smd" is used for the namespace
   "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0" [RFC7848], 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.

   The XML namespace prefix "mark" is used for the namespace
   "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0" [RFC7848], 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.

2.  Object Attributes

   This extension adds additional elements to the EPP domain name
   mapping [RFC5731].  Only those new elements are described here.

2.1.  Application Identifier

   Servers MAY allow multiple applications, referred to as a Launch
   Application, of the same domain name during its launch phase
   operations.  Upon receiving a valid <domain:create> command to create
   a Launch Application, the server MUST create an application object
   corresponding to the request, assign an application identifier for
   the Launch Application, set the pendingCreate status [RFC5731], and
   return the application identifier to the client with the

Top      ToC       Page 5 
   <launch:applicationID> element.  In order to facilitate correlation,
   all subsequent launch operations on the Launch Application MUST be
   qualified by the previously assigned application identifier using the
   <launch:applicationID> element.

2.2.  Validator Identifier

   The Validator Identifier is unique to the server and is the
   identifier for a Trademark Validator, which validates marks and has a
   repository of validated marks.  The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute
   is used to define the Validator Identifier of the Trademark
   Validator.  Registries MAY support more than one third-party
   Trademark Validator.  The unique set of Validator Identifier values
   supported by the server is up to server policy.  The Internet
   Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Trademark
   Clearinghouse (TMCH) is the default Trademark Validator and is
   reserved for the Validator Identifier of "tmch".  If the ICANN TMCH
   is not used or multiple Trademark Validators are used, the Validator
   Identifier MUST be defined using the "validatorID" attribute.

   The Validator Identifier MAY be related to one or more issuer
   identifiers of the <mark:id> and <smd:id> elements defined in
   [RFC7848].  Both the Validator Identifier and the Issuer Identifier
   used MUST be unique in the server.  If the ICANN TMCH is not used or
   multiple Trademark Validators are used, the server MUST define the
   list of supported validator identifiers and MUST make this
   information available to clients using a mutually acceptable, out-of-
   band mechanism.

   The Validator Identifier may define a non-Trademark Validator that
   supports a form of claims, where claims and a Validator Identifier
   can be used for purposes beyond trademarks.

2.3.  Launch Phases

   The server MAY support multiple launch phases sequentially or
   simultaneously.  The <launch:phase> element MUST be included by the
   client to define the target launch phase of the command.  The server
   SHOULD validate the phase and MAY validate the sub-phase of the
   <launch:phase> element against the active phase and OPTIONAL sub-
   phase of the server, and return an EPP error result code of 2306
   [RFC5730] if there is a mismatch.

   The following launch phase values are defined:

   sunrise:  The phase during which trademark holders can submit
      registrations or applications with trademark information that can
      be validated by the server.

Top      ToC       Page 6 
   landrush:  A post-"sunrise" launch phase when non-trademark holders
      are allowed to register domain names with steps taken to address a
      large volume of initial registrations.

   claims:  The phase, as defined in Section 2.3.1, in which a claims
      notice must be displayed to a prospective registrant of a domain
      name that matches trademarks.

   open:  A phase that is also referred to as "steady state".  Servers
      may require additional trademark protection during this phase.

   custom:  A custom server launch phase that is defined using the
      "name" attribute.

   For extensibility, the <launch:phase> element includes an OPTIONAL
   "name" attribute that can define a sub-phase or the full name of the
   phase when the <launch:phase> element has the "custom" value.  For
   example, the "claims" launch phase could have two sub-phases that
   include "landrush" and "open".

   Launch phases MAY overlap to support the "claims" launch phase,
   defined in Section 2.3.1, and to support a traditional "landrush"
   launch phase.  The overlap of the "claims" and "landrush" launch
   phases SHOULD be handled by setting "claims" as the <launch:phase>
   value and setting "landrush" as the sub-phase with the "name"
   attribute.  For example, the <launch:phase> element should be
   <launch:phase name="landrush">claims</launch:phase>.

2.3.1.  Trademark Claims Phase

   The Trademark Claims Phase is when a claims notice must be displayed
   to a prospective registrant of a domain name that matches trademarks.
   See [ICANN-TMCH] for additional details of trademark claims handling.
   The source of the trademarks is a Trademark Validator, and the source
   of the claims notice information is a Claims Notice Information
   Service (CNIS), which may be directly linked to a Trademark
   Validator.  The client interfaces with 1) the server to determine if
   a trademark exists for a domain name, 2) a CNIS to get the claims
   notice information, and 3) the server to pass the claims notice
   acceptance information in a create command.  This document supports
   the Trademark Claims Phase in two ways, including:

   Claims Check Form:  Is defined in Section 3.1.1 and is used to
      determine whether or not there are any matching trademarks for a
      domain name.  If there is at least one matching trademark that
      exists for the domain name, a claims key is returned.  The mapping
      of domain names and the claims keys is based on an out-of-band
      interface between the server and the Trademark Validator.  The

Top      ToC       Page 7 
      CNIS associated with the claims key Validator Identifier
      (Section 2.2) MUST accept the claims key as the basis for
      retrieving the claims information.

   Claims Create Form:  Is defined in Section 3.3.2 and is used to pass
      the claims notice acceptance information in a create command.  The
      notice identifier (<launch:noticeID>) format, validation rules,
      and server processing is up to the interface between the server
      and the Trademark Validator.  The CNIS associated with the
      Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) MUST generate a notice
      identifier compliant with the <launch:noticeID> element.

Top      ToC       Page 8 
   The following shows the Trademark Claims Phase registration flow:

    .------------.     .--------.                   .--------.  .------.
    | Registrant |     | Client |                   | Server |  | CNIS |
    '------------'     '--------'                   '--------'  '------'
           | Request Domain |                            |          |
           |   Registration |                            |          |
           |--------------->| Domain Check               |          |
           |                |--------------------------->|          |
           | Domain         | Domain Unavailable   .------------.   |
           |   Unavailable  |<---------------------( Available? )   |
           |<---------------|                  No  '------------'   |
           |                | Domain Available           | Yes      |
           |                |<---------------------------|          |
           |                | Domain Claims Check        |          |
           |                |--------------------------->|          |
           |                |                       .---------.     |
           |                | Claims Don't Exist   /    Does   \    |
           |                |<--------------------( Domain have )   |
           |                |                   No \  Claims?  /    |
           |                |                       '---------'     |
           |                | Domain Create              |  | Yes   |
           |                |--------------------------->|  |       |
           | Domain         | Domain Registered          |  |       |
           |   Registered   |<---------------------------|  |       |
           |<---------------|                               |       |
           |                                                |       |
           |                | Claims Exist with Claims Keys |       |
           |                |<------------------------------'       |
           |                |                                       |
   .-----. |                | Request Claims Info with Claims Key   |
   |Abort| | Display        |-------------------------------------->|
   '-----' | Claims         | Return Claims Info                    |
    ^      | Notice         |<--------------------------------------|
    | No   |<---------------|                                       |
    |  .------.  Yes        |                                       |
    '-(  Ack?  )----------->| Domain Claims Create Form  |          |
       '------'             |--------------------------->|          |
           | Registration   | Error       .----------------------.  |
           |   Error        |<-----------( Validation Successful? ) |
           |<---------------|          No '----------------------'  |
           |                |                            | Yes      |
           | Domain         | Domain Registered          |          |
           |   Registered   |<---------------------------|          |
           |<---------------|                            |          |

                                 Figure 1

Top      ToC       Page 9 
2.4.  Status Values

   A Launch Application or Launch Registration object MAY have a launch
   status value.  The <launch:status> element is used to convey the
   launch status pertaining to the object, beyond what is specified in
   the object mapping.  A Launch Application or Launch Registration MUST
   set the "pendingCreate" status [RFC5731] if a launch status is
   supported and is not one of the final statuses ("allocated" and
   "rejected").

   The following status values are defined using the required "s"
   attribute:

   pendingValidation:  The initial state of a newly created application
      or registration object.  The application or registration requires
      validation, but the validation process has not yet completed.

   validated:  The application or registration meets relevant registry
      rules.

   invalid:  The application or registration does not validate according
      to registry rules.  Server policies permitting, it may transition
      back into "pendingValidation" for revalidation, after
      modifications are made to ostensibly correct attributes that
      caused the validation failure.

   pendingAllocation:  The allocation of the application or registration
      is pending based on the results of some out-of-band process (for
      example, an auction).

   allocated:  The object corresponding to the application or
      registration has been provisioned.  This is a possible end state
      of an application or registration object.

   rejected:  The application or registration object was not
      provisioned.  This is a possible end state of an application or
      registration object.

   custom:  A custom status that is defined using the "name" attribute.

   Each status value MAY be accompanied by a string of human-readable
   text that describes the rationale for the status applied to the
   object.  The OPTIONAL "lang" attribute, as defined in [RFC5646], MAY
   be present to identify the language if the negotiated value is
   something other than the default value of "en" (English).

Top      ToC       Page 10 
   For extensibility, the <launch:status> element includes an OPTIONAL
   "name" attribute that can define a sub-status or the full name of the
   status when the status value is "custom".  The server SHOULD use one
   of the non-"custom" status values.

   Status values MAY be skipped.  For example, an application or
   registration MAY immediately start at the "allocated" status, or an
   application or registration MAY skip the "pendingAllocation" status.
   If the launch phase does not require validation of a request, an
   application or registration MAY immediately skip to
   "pendingAllocation".

Top      ToC       Page 11 
2.4.1.  State Transition

   The transitions between the states is a matter of server policy.
   This diagram defines one possible set of permitted transitions.

                      | request
                      |
                      |     +--------------------------+
                      |     |                          |
                      v     v                          |
            +-------------------+                      |
            |                   |                      |
            | pendingValidation +--------------+       |
            |                   |              |       |
            +---------+---------+              |       |
                      |                        |       |
                      |                        |       |
                      v                        v       |
                +-----------+             +---------+  |
                |           |             |         |  |
                | validated |             | invalid +--+
                |           |             |         |
                +-----+-----+             +----+----+
                      |                        |
                      |                        |
                      v                        |
            +-------------------+              |
            |                   |              |
            | pendingAllocation +-----------+  |
            |                   |           |  |
            +---------+---------+           |  |
                      |                     |  |
                      |                     |  |
                      |                     |  |
                      |                     |  |
                      |                     |  |
                      v                     v  v
                 +---------+             +--------+
                /           \           /          \
                | allocated |           | rejected |
                \           /           \          /
                 +---------+             +--------+


                                 Figure 2

Top      ToC       Page 12 
2.5.  Poll Messaging

   A Launch Application MUST be handled as an EPP domain name object as
   specified in RFC 5731 [RFC5731], with the "pendingCreate" status and
   launch status values defined in Section 2.4.  A Launch Registration
   MAY be handled as an EPP domain name object as specified in RFC 5731
   [RFC5731], with the "pendingCreate" status and launch status values
   defined in Section 2.4.  As a Launch Application or Launch
   Registration transitions between the status values defined in
   Section 2.4, the server SHOULD insert poll messages, per [RFC5730],
   for the applicable intermediate statuses, including the
   "pendingValidation", "validated", "pendingAllocation", and "invalid"
   statuses, using the <domain:infData> element with the
   <launch:infData> extension.  The <domain:infData> element MAY contain
   non-mandatory information, like contact and name server information.
   Also, further extensions that would normally be included in the
   response of a <domain:info> command, per [RFC5731], MAY be included.
   For the final statuses, including the "allocated" and "rejected"
   statuses, the server MUST insert a <domain:panData> poll message, per
   [RFC5731], with the <launch:infData> extension.

   The following is an example poll message for a Launch Application
   that has transitioned to the "pendingAllocation" state.

   S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
   S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
   S:  <response>
   S:    <result code="1301">
   S:      <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
   S:    </result>
   S:    <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
   S:      <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate>
   S:      <msg>Application pendingAllocation.</msg>
   S:    </msgQ>
   S:    <resData>
   S:      <domain:infData
   S:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
   S:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
   S:        ...
   S:      </domain:infData>
   S:    </resData>
   S:    <extension>
   S:      <launch:infData
   S:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
   S:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
   S:        <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
   S:        <launch:status s="pendingAllocation"/>
   S:      </launch:infData>

Top      ToC       Page 13 
   S:    </extension>
   S:    <trID>
   S:      <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
   S:      <svTRID>54322-XYZ</svTRID>
   S:    </trID>
   S:  </response>
   S:</epp>

   The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an
   "allocated" Launch Application.

   S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
   S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
   S:  <response>
   S:    <result code="1301">
   S:      <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
   S:    </result>
   S:    <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
   S:      <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate>
   S:      <msg>Application successfully allocated.</msg>
   S:    </msgQ>
   S:    <resData>
   S:      <domain:panData
   S:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
   S:        <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name>
   S:        <domain:paTRID>
   S:          <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
   S:          <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
   S:        </domain:paTRID>
   S:        <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate>
   S:      </domain:panData>
   S:    </resData>
   S:    <extension>
   S:      <launch:infData
   S:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
   S:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
   S:        <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
   S:        <launch:status s="allocated"/>
   S:      </launch:infData>
   S:    </extension>
   S:    <trID>
   S:      <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID>
   S:      <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID>
   S:    </trID>
   S:  </response>
   S:</epp>

Top      ToC       Page 14 
   The following is an example <domain:panData> poll message for an
   "allocated" Launch Registration.

   S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
   S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
   S:  <response>
   S:    <result code="1301">
   S:      <msg>Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue</msg>
   S:    </result>
   S:    <msgQ count="5" id="12345">
   S:      <qDate>2013-04-04T22:01:00.0Z</qDate>
   S:      <msg>Registration successfully allocated.</msg>
   S:    </msgQ>
   S:    <resData>
   S:      <domain:panData
   S:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
   S:        <domain:name paResult="1">domain.example</domain:name>
   S:        <domain:paTRID>
   S:          <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
   S:          <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
   S:        </domain:paTRID>
   S:        <domain:paDate>2013-04-04T22:00:00.0Z</domain:paDate>
   S:      </domain:panData>
   S:    </resData>
   S:    <extension>
   S:      <launch:infData
   S:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
   S:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
   S:        <launch:status s="allocated"/>
   S:      </launch:infData>
   S:    </extension>
   S:    <trID>
   S:      <clTRID>BCD-23456</clTRID>
   S:      <svTRID>65432-WXY</svTRID>
   S:    </trID>
   S:  </response>
   S:</epp>

2.6.  Mark Validation Models

   A server MUST support at least one of the following models for
   validating trademark information:

   code:  Use of a mark code by itself to validate that the mark matches
      the domain name.  This model is supported using the
      <launch:codeMark> element with just the <launch:code> element.

Top      ToC       Page 15 
   mark:  The mark information is passed without any other validation
      element.  The server will use some custom form of validation to
      validate that the mark information is authentic.  This model is
      supported using the <launch:codeMark> element with just the
      <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element.

   code with mark:  A code is used along with the mark information by
      the server to validate the mark utilizing an external party.  The
      code represents some form of secret that matches the mark
      information passed.  This model is supported using the
      <launch:codeMark> element that contains both the <launch:code> and
      the <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements.

   signed mark:  The mark information is digitally signed as described
      in the Digital Signature section (Section 2.6.3).  The digital
      signature can be directly validated by the server using the public
      key of the external party that created the signed mark using its
      private key.  This model is supported using the <smd:signedMark>
      (Section 2.6.3.1) and <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2)
      elements.

   More than one <launch:codeMark>, <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1),
   or <smd:encodedSignedMark> (Section 2.6.3.2) element MAY be
   specified.  The maximum number of marks per domain name is up to
   server policy.

2.6.1.  <launch:codeMark> Element

   The <launch:codeMark> element is used by the "code", "mark", and
   "code with mark" validation models and has the following child
   elements:

   <launch:code>:  OPTIONAL mark code used to validate the <mark:mark>
      (Section 2.6.2) information.  The mark code is a mark-specific
      secret that the server can verify against a third party.  The
      OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the Validator Identifier
      (Section 2.2) whose value indicates which Trademark Validator the
      code originated from, with no default value.

   <mark:mark>:  OPTIONAL mark information with child elements defined
      in the Mark section (Section 2.6.2).

Top      ToC       Page 16 
   The following is an example <launch:codeMark> element with both a
   <launch:code> and <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) element.

   <launch:codeMark>
     <launch:code validatorID="sample">
       49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code>
     <mark:mark xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
       ...
     </mark:mark>
   </launch:codeMark>

2.6.2.  <mark:mark> Element

   A <mark:mark> element describes an applicant's prior right to a given
   domain name that is used with the "mark", "mark with code", and
   "signed mark" validation models.  The <mark:mark> element is defined
   in [RFC7848].  A new mark format can be supported by creating a new
   XML schema for the mark that has an element that substitutes for the
   <mark:abstractMark> element from [RFC7848].

2.6.3.  Digital Signature

   Digital signatures MAY be used by the server to validate the mark
   information, when using the "signed mark" validation model with the
   <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) and <smd:encodedSignedMark>
   (Section 2.6.3.2) elements.  When using digital signatures, the
   server MUST validate the digital signature.

2.6.3.1.  <smd:signedMark> Element

   The <smd:signedMark> element contains the digitally signed mark
   information.  The <smd:signedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848].
   A new signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML
   schema for the signed mark that has an element that substitutes for
   the <smd:abstractSignedMark> element from [RFC7848].

2.6.3.2.  <smd:encodedSignedMark> Element

   The <smd:encodedSignedMark> element contains an encoded form of the
   digitally signed <smd:signedMark> (Section 2.6.3.1) element.  The
   <smd:encodedSignedMark> element is defined in [RFC7848].  A new
   encoded signed mark format can be supported by creating a new XML
   schema for the encoded signed mark that has an element that
   substitutes for the <smd:encodedSignedMark> element from [RFC7848].


Next Section