On 2017-08-08 16:25, Gould, James wrote:
> Overall, I believe that “phase-agnostic” premium domain names is not
> a model that draft-ietf-regext-launchphase is designed for or should
> be designed for.
I assume you mean "phase-aware". By "phase-agnostic", I meant the
opposite, i.e. the model you're proposing - premium domains which are
not connected to or dependent on launch phases.
> My recommendation is to focus on how
> draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees can meet your needs for premium domain
> names without coupling it with launch phases as an alternative for
> fee classifications.
As said in a previous e-mail, a complete refactoring of our premium
model seems prohibitively expensive at this juncture, since all our
tariff management, promotion infrastructure, registration policy engine
code etc. is closely tied to launch phases. We might be able to still
retain our use of the fee extension, if only by completely hiding any
launch phase related data from it, even if the system still works with
launch phases under the hood.
If all else fails, we can always use a proprietary extension.
Still, and this is going back to the original topic of phase discovery:
if it was clearly (as I demonstrated out in a previous e-mail) the
intention of the launch phase extension authors to allow multiple phases
at the same time, and to make certain domain names only available in
certain phases, why should we make it so hard for registrars to discover
the right phase for their domain?
Why not offer a "phase-avail" check form to discover the phase in which
a domain is available, rather than forcing *all* registrars to code
their own iteration of <check>s over all known (for some definition of
"known") launch phases to discover it?
| knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH
Dipl.-Informatiker Tel: +49 231 9703-0
Thomas Corte Fax: +49 231 9703-200
Stellvertretender Leiter SIP: thomas.co...@knipp.de
Software-Entwicklung E-Mail: thomas.co...@knipp.de
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
regext mailing list