Subject: [ietf-provreg] Question concerning Status clientRenewProhibited

From: Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:57:50 +0100 (CET)

Hi!

We are currently designing our EPP implementation, and have some 
questions concerning the status 'clientRenewProhibited':

Does anybody use the status 'clientRenewProhibited'?
What purpose(s) is it used for?

Was there a specific purpose in mind for 'clientRenewProhibited' while 
standardizing the EPP Protocol, or was it just for completeness / possible 
future use?

cheers,
  Bernie

---

From: "Elias Sidenbladh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:13:42 +0100

> What purpose(s) is it used for?

It's the same as for 'clientUpdateProhibited', you can stop yourself from doing something stupid by setting that flag.

Regards,
Elias Sidenbladh

--
.SE (The Internet Infrastructure Foundation)

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:43:52 -0500

> What purpose(s) is it used for?

A natural use of this status is for the client to prevent the renewal
of the object.  In some registries, the policy is to renew
automatically a domain on expiry.  A client may wish to prevent such
renewal, because _its_ client hasn't paid, has bad credit, or
whatever.  

I don't know if any registry actually implements it this way; the
specification appears to allow the server to perform automatic
operations irrespective of what the client settings are.  And since
it's in the interests of server operators to perform the renewal
anyway, they might do that.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<[email-masked]>                              M2P 2A8
jabber: [email-masked]                 +1 416 646 3304 x4110

---

From: James Gould <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:37:00 -0500

For the VeriSign Registries the clientRenewProhibited only prohibits
explicit renew commands and does not effect auto-renew.  I don't know of
anyone using the clientRenewProhibited, so its inclusion seems to be more
for completeness.  

JG 

-------------------------------------------------------
James F. Gould
Principal Software Engineer
VeriSign Information Services
[email-masked]
Direct: 703.948.3271
Mobile: 703.628.7063

21345 Ridgetop Circle
LS2-2-1
Dulles, VA 20166

Notice to Recipient:  This e-mail contains confidential, proprietary and/or
Registry  Sensitive information intended solely for the recipient and, thus
may not be  retransmitted, reproduced or disclosed without the prior written
consent of  VeriSign Naming and Directory Services.  If you have received
this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately by
telephone or reply e-mail and destroy the original message without making a
copy.  Thank you.

> From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
> Reply-To: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:43:52 -0500
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] Question concerning Status clientRenewProhibited
>

---

From: "Asbjorn S. Mikkelsen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:54:17 +0000

Hi,

It looks like Go Daddy is using this status for my domains when I
request them to "Lock" my domains:

For .name:
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited

For .com:
EPP Status: clientDeleteProhibited
EPP Status: clientRenewProhibited
EPP Status: clientTransferProhibited
EPP Status: clientUpdateProhibited

I have seen this "locking" done by other .name registrars as well.

Cheers,

Asbjorn

On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 09:37 -0500, James Gould wrote:
> !DSPAM:1009,4561bf526827011912916!
> 
> 
-- 
Asbjorn Steira Mikkelsen <[email-masked]>
CTO
The Global Name Registry, Limited
_____________________________________________________

Information contained herein is Global Name Registry Proprietary
Information and/or Registry Sensitive Information and is made available
to you because of your interest in or affiliation with our company. This
information is submitted in confidence and its disclosure to you is not
intended to constitute public disclosure or authorization for disclosure
to other parties. Should you have received this email and are not an
intended recipient, please delete this email in its entirety. Global
Name Registry is registered with the Office of the UK Information
Commissioner.

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:11:31 -0500

> request them to "Lock" my domains:

This might be just historical accident.  The original .info
implementation, which was based on the earliest drafts around, used
clientLock and serverLock instead of these more-granular status
values.  Similarly, when we move a registry from RRP to EPP, we have
to map the various LOCK status values into the granular EPP values. 
In both cases, our answer was to add as many of the EPP status values
as needed to emulate the more-comprehensive status, so we included
*RenewProhibited part of the "package" from a LOCK.  It was a sane
map, and since registrars often use the expression "to lock a
domain", I expect the behaviour will hang around for some time.

A