[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-ietf-rege...] [Tracker] [Diff1] [Diff2]
PROPOSED STANDARD

    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.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 1]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    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

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 2]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    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.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 3]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 4]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       <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.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 5]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 6]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

          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.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 7]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 8]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    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).

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 9]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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".

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 10]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    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

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 11]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    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>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 12]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 13]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 14]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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).

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 15]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       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].

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 16]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.  EPP Command Mapping

       A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found
       in the EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730].  The command
       mappings described here are specifically for use in the Launch Phase
       Extension.

       This mapping is designed to be flexible, requiring only a minimum set
       of required elements.

       While it is meant to serve several use cases, it does not prescribe
       any interpretation by the client or server.  Such processing is
       typically highly policy dependent and therefore specific to
       implementations.

       Operations on application objects are done via one or more of the
       existing EPP commands defined in the EPP domain name mapping
       [RFC5731].  Registries MAY choose to support a subset of the
       operations.

    3.1.  EPP <check> Command

       There are three forms of the extension to the EPP <check> command:
       the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), the Availability Check Form
       (Section 3.1.2), and the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3).  The
       <launch:check> element "type" attribute defines the form, with the
       value of "claims" for the Claims Check Form (Section 3.1.1), "avail"
       for the Availability Check Form (Section 3.1.2), and "trademark" for
       the Trademark Check Form (Section 3.1.3).  The default value of the
       "type" attribute is "claims".  The forms supported by the server is
       determined by server policy.  The server MUST return an EPP error
       result code of 2307 [RFC5730] if it receives a check form that is not
       supported.

    3.1.1.  Claims Check Form

       The Claims Check Form defines a new command called the Claims Check
       Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any
       matching trademarks, in the specified launch phase, for each domain
       name passed in the command, that require the use of the "Claims
       Create Form" on a Domain Create Command.  The availability check
       information defined in the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731] MUST NOT
       be returned for the Claims Check Command.  This form is the default
       form and MAY be explicitly identified by setting the <launch:check>
       "type" attribute to "claims".

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 17]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the Claims
       Check Command will return whether or not at least one matching
       trademark exists for the domain name, which requires the use of the
       "Claims Create Form" on a Domain Create Command.  If there is at
       least one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a
       <launch:claimKey> element is returned.  The client MAY then use the
       value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain information needed
       to generate the Trademark Claims Notice from the Trademark Validator
       based on the Validator Identifier (Section 2.2).  The unique notice
       identifier of the Trademark Claims Notice MUST be passed in the
       <launch:noticeID> element of the extension to the Create Command
       (Section 3.3).

       The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain
       name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check for matching
       trademarks.  The <launch:check> element contains the following child
       element:

       <launch:phase>:  Contains the value of the active launch phase of the
           server.  The server SHOULD validate the value according to
           Section 2.3.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 18]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example Claims Check Command using the <check>
       domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type"
       explicitly set to "claims", to determine if "domain1.example",
       "domain2.example", and "domain3.example" require claims notices
       during the "claims" launch phase:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <check>
       C:    <domain:check
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name>
       C:      <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name>
       C:      <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:check>
       C:   </check>
       C:   <extension>
       C:    <launch:check
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:     type="claims">
       C:      <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase>
       C:    </launch:check>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
       <response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that
       identifies the launch namespace.  The <launch:chkData> element
       contains the following child elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The phase that mirrors the <launch:phase> element
           included in the <launch:check>.

       <launch:cd>:  One or more <launch:cd> elements that contain the
           following child elements:

           <launch:name>:  Contains the fully qualified name of the queried
               domain name.  This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute
               whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the
               domain name that requires the use of the "Claims Create Form"
               on a Domain Create Command.  A value of "1" (or "true") means
               that a matching trademark does exist and that the "Claims
               Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command.  A value

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 19]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

               of "0" (or "false") means that a matching trademark does not
               exist or that the "Claims Create Form" is NOT required on a
               Domain Create Command.

           <launch:claimKey>:  Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be
               passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN
               TMCH for querying the information needed to generate a
               Trademark Claims Notice.  The <launch:claimKey> is used as
               the key for the query in place of the domain name to securely
               query the service without using a well-known value like a
               domain name.  The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the
               Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates
               which Trademark Validator to query for the claims notice
               information, with the default being the ICANN TMCH.  The
               "validatorID" attribute MAY reference a non-trademark claims
               clearinghouse identifier to support other forms of claims
               notices.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 20]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example Claims Check response when a claims
       notice for the "claims" launch phase is not required for the domain
       name domain1.example, is required for the domain name domain2.example
       in the "tmch", and is required for the domain name domain3.example in
       the "tmch" and "custom-tmch":

       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="1000">
       S:     <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
       S:    </result>
       S:    <extension>
       S:     <launch:chkData
       S:      xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       S:      <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase>
       S:      <launch:cd>
       S:        <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name>
       S:      </launch:cd>
       S:      <launch:cd>
       S:        <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name>
       S:        <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
       S:        2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
       S:        </launch:claimKey>
       S:      </launch:cd>
       S:      <launch:cd>
       S:        <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name>
       S:        <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
       S:        2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
       S:        </launch:claimKey>
       S:        <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch">
       S:        20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002
       S:        </launch:claimKey>
       S:      </launch:cd>
       S:     </launch:chkData>
       S:    </extension>
       S:    <trID>
       S:     <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       S:     <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:    </trID>
       S:  </response>
       S:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 21]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.1.2.  Availability Check Form

       The Availability Check Form defines additional elements to extend the
       EPP <check> command described in the EPP domain name mapping
       [RFC5731].  No additional elements are defined for the EPP <check>
       response.  This form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check>
       "type" attribute to "avail".

       The EPP <check> command is used to determine if an object can be
       provisioned within a repository.  Domain names may be made available
       only in unique launch phases, whilst remaining unavailable for
       concurrent launch phases.  In addition to the elements expressed in
       the <domain:check>, the command is extended with the <launch:check>
       element that contains the following child element:

       <launch:phase>:  The launch phase to which domain name availability
           should be determined.  The server SHOULD validate the value and
           return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if it is
           invalid.

       The following is an example Availability Check Form Command using the
       <check> domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the
       "type" set to "avail", to determine the availability of two domain
       names in the "idn-release" custom launch phase:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <check>
       C:    <domain:check
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name>
       C:      <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:check>
       C:   </check>
       C:   <extension>
       C:    <launch:check
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:     type="avail">
       C:      <launch:phase name="idn-release">custom</launch:phase>
       C:    </launch:check>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 22]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The Availability Check Form does not define any extension to the
       response of a <check> domain command.  After processing the command,
       the server replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP
       domain name mapping [RFC5731].

    3.1.3.  Trademark Check Form

       The Trademark Check Form defines a new command called the Trademark
       Check Command that is used to determine whether or not there are any
       matching trademarks for each domain name passed in the command,
       independent of the active launch phase of the server and whether the
       "Claims Create Form" is required on a Domain Create Command.  The
       availability check information defined in the EPP domain name mapping
       [RFC5731] MUST NOT be returned for the Trademark Check Command.  This
       form MUST be identified by setting the <launch:check> "type"
       attribute to "trademark".

       Instead of returning whether the domain name is available, the
       Trademark Check Command will return whether or not at least one
       matching trademark exists for the domain name.  If there is at least
       one matching trademark that exists for the domain name, a
       <launch:claimKey> element is returned.  The client MAY then use the
       value of the <launch:claimKey> element to obtain Trademark Claims
       Notice information from the Trademark Validator based on the
       Validator Identifier (Section 2.2).

       The <domain:name> elements in the EPP <check> command of EPP domain
       name mapping [RFC5731] define the domain names to check for matching
       trademarks.  The <launch:check> element does not contain any child
       elements with the "Trademark Check Form":

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 23]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example Trademark Check Command using the <check>
       domain command and the <launch:check> extension with the "type" set
       to "trademark", to determine if "domain1.example", "domain2.example",
       and "domain3.example" have any matching trademarks:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <check>
       C:    <domain:check
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>domain1.example</domain:name>
       C:      <domain:name>domain2.example</domain:name>
       C:      <domain:name>domain3.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:check>
       C:   </check>
       C:   <extension>
       C:    <launch:check
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:     type="trademark"/>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       If the <check> command has been processed successfully, the EPP
       <response> MUST contain an <extension> <launch:chkData> element that
       identifies the launch namespace.  The <launch:chkData> element
       contains the following child elements:

       <launch:cd>:  One or more <launch:cd> elements that contain the
           following child elements:

           <launch:name>:  Contains the fully qualified name of the queried
               domain name.  This element MUST contain an "exists" attribute
               whose value indicates if a matching trademark exists for the
               domain name.  A value of "1" (or "true") means that a
               matching trademark does exist.  A value of "0" (or "false")
               means that a matching trademark does not exist.

           <launch:claimKey>:  Zero or more OPTIONAL claim keys that MAY be
               passed to a third-party Trademark Validator such as the ICANN
               TMCH for querying the information needed to generate a
               Trademark Claims Notice.  The <launch:claimKey> is used as
               the key for the query in place of the domain name to securely
               query the service without using a well-known value like a
               domain name.  The OPTIONAL "validatorID" attribute is the
               Validator Identifier (Section 2.2) whose value indicates

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 24]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

               which Trademark Validator to query for the claims notice
               information, with the default being the ICANN TMCH.  The
               "validatorID" attribute MAY reference a non-trademark claims
               clearinghouse identifier to support other forms of claims
               notices.

       The following is an example Trademark Check response for the "claims"
       launch phase when no matching trademarks are found for the domain
       name domain1.example, matching trademarks are found for the domain
       name domain2.example in the "tmch", and matching trademarks are found
       for domain name domain3.example in the "tmch" and "custom-tmch":

       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="1000">
       S:     <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
       S:    </result>
       S:    <extension>
       S:     <launch:chkData
       S:      xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       S:      <launch:cd>
       S:        <launch:name exists="0">domain1.example</launch:name>
       S:      </launch:cd>
       S:      <launch:cd>
       S:        <launch:name exists="1">domain2.example</launch:name>
       S:        <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
       S:        2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
       S:        </launch:claimKey>
       S:      </launch:cd>
       S:      <launch:cd>
       S:        <launch:name exists="1">domain3.example</launch:name>
       S:        <launch:claimKey validatorID="tmch">
       S:        2013041500/2/6/9/rJ1NrDO92vDsAzf7EQzgjX4R0000000001
       S:        </launch:claimKey>
       S:        <launch:claimKey validatorID="custom-tmch">
       S:        20140423200/1/2/3/rJ1Nr2vDsAzasdff7EasdfgjX4R000000002
       S:        </launch:claimKey>
       S:      </launch:cd>
       S:     </launch:chkData>
       S:    </extension>
       S:    <trID>
       S:     <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       S:     <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:    </trID>
       S:  </response>
       S:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 25]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.2.  EPP <info> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <info>
       command and response to be used in conjunction with the EPP domain
       name mapping [RFC5731].

       The EPP <info> command is used to retrieve information for a Launch
       Registration or Launch Application.  The Application Identifier
       (Section 2.1) returned in the <launch:creData> element of the create
       response (Section 3.3) can be used for retrieving information for a
       Launch Application.  A <launch:info> element is sent along with the
       regular <info> domain command.  The <launch:info> element includes an
       OPTIONAL "includeMark" boolean attribute, with a default value of
       "false", to indicate whether or not to include the mark in the
       response.  The <launch:info> element contains the following child
       elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The phase during which the application or
           registration was submitted or is associated with.  Server policy
           defines the phases that are supported.  The server SHOULD
           validate the value and return an EPP error result code of 2306
           [RFC5730] if it is invalid.

       <launch:applicationID>:  OPTIONAL application identifier of the
           Launch Application.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 26]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <info> domain command with the
       <launch:info> extension to retrieve information for the sunrise
       application for domain.example and application identifier "abc123":

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <info>
       C:    <domain:info
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:info>
       C:   </info>
       C:   <extension>
       C:    <launch:info
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:       includeMark="true">
       C:      <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:      <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
       C:    </launch:info>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       The following is an example <info> domain command with the
       <launch:info> extension to retrieve information for the sunrise
       registration for domain.example:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <info>
       C:    <domain:info
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:info>
       C:   </info>
       C:   <extension>
       C:    <launch:info
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:      <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:    </launch:info>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 27]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       If the query was successful, the server replies with a
       <launch:infData> element along with the regular EPP <resData>.  The
       <launch:infData> contains the following child elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The phase during which the application was submitted
           or is associated with that matches the associated <info> command
           <launch:phase>.

       <launch:applicationID>:  OPTIONAL Application Identifier of the
           Launch Application.

       <launch:status>:  OPTIONAL status of the Launch Application using one
           of the supported status values (Section 2.4).

       <mark:mark>:  Zero or more <mark:mark> (Section 2.6.2) elements only
           if the "includeMark" attribute is "true" in the command.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 28]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <info> domain response using the
       <launch:infData> extension with the mark information:

       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="1000">
       S:      <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
       S:    </result>
       S:    <resData>
       S:      <domain:infData
       S:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       S:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       S:        <domain:roid>EXAMPLE1-REP</domain:roid>
       S:        <domain:status s="pendingCreate"/>
       S:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       S:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       S:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       S:        <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID>
       S:        <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID>
       S:        <domain:crDate>2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate>
       S:        <domain:authInfo>
       S:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       S:        </domain:authInfo>
       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="pendingValidation"/>
       S:          <mark:mark
       S:            xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
       S:             ...
       S:         </mark:mark>
       S:      </launch:infData>
       S:    </extension>
       S:    <trID>
       S:      <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       S:      <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:    </trID>
       S:  </response>
       S:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 29]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.3.  EPP <create> Command

       There are four forms of the extension to the EPP <create> command
       that include the Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1), the Claims
       Create Form (Section 3.3.2), the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3),
       and the Mixed Create Form (Section 3.3.4).  The form used is
       dependent on the supported launch phases (Section 2.3) as defined
       below.

       sunrise:  The EPP <create> command with the "sunrise" launch phase is
          used to submit a registration with trademark information that can
          be verified by the server with the <domain:name> value.  The
          Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) is used for the "sunrise"
          launch phase.

       landrush:  The EPP <create> command with the "landrush" launch phase
          MAY use the General Create Form (Section 3.3.3) to explicitly
          specify the phase and optionally define the expected type of
          object to create.

       claims:  The EPP <create> command with the "claims" launch phase is
          used to pass the information associated with the presentation and
          acceptance of the claims notice.  The Claims Create Form
          (Section 3.3.2) is used, and the General Create Form
          (Section 3.3.3) MAY be used for the "claims" launch phase.

       open:  The EPP <create> command with the "open" launch phase is
          undefined, but the form supported is up to server policy.  The
          Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be used to pass the
          information associated with the presentation and acceptance of the
          claims notice if required for the domain name.

       custom:  The EPP <create> command with the "custom" launch phase is
          undefined, but the form supported is up to server policy.

    3.3.1.  Sunrise Create Form

       The Sunrise Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name
       mapping [RFC5731] includes the verifiable trademark information that
       the server uses to match against the domain name to authorize the
       domain create.  A server MUST support one of four models in Mark
       Validation Models (Section 2.6) to verify the trademark information
       passed by the client.

       A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create>
       domain command.  The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type"
       attribute that defines the expected type of object ("application" or
       "registration") to create.  The server SHOULD validate the "type"

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 30]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be
       created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if the
       type is incorrect.  The <launch:create> element contains the
       following child elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The identifier for the launch phase.  The server
           SHOULD validate the value according to Section 2.3.

       <launch:codeMark> or <smd:signedMark> or <smd:encodedSignedMark>:

           <launch:codeMark>:  Zero or more <launch:codeMark> elements.  The
               <launch:codeMark> child elements are defined in
               "<launch:codeMark> Element" (Section 2.6.1).

           <smd:signedMark>:  Zero or more <smd:signedMark> elements.  The
               <smd:signedMark> child elements are defined in
               "<smd:signedMark> Element" (Section 2.6.3.1).

           <smd:encodedSignedMark>:  Zero or more <smd:encodedSignedMark>
               elements.  The <smd:encodedSignedMark> child elements are
               defined in "<smd:encodedSignedMark> Element"
               (Section 2.6.3.2).

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 31]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension, following the "code" validation model,
       with multiple sunrise codes:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:        <launch:codeMark>
       C:          <launch:code validatorID="sample1">
       C:            49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code>
       C:        </launch:codeMark>
       C:        <launch:codeMark>
       C:          <launch:code>49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AD</launch:code>
       C:        </launch:codeMark>
       C:        <launch:codeMark>
       C:          <launch:code validatorID="sample2">
       C:            49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AE</launch:code>
       C:        </launch:codeMark>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 32]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension, following the "mark" validation model,
       with the mark information:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:        <launch:codeMark>
       C:          <mark:mark
       C:            xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
       C:            ...
       C:          </mark:mark>
       C:        </launch:codeMark>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 33]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension, following the "code with mark" validation
       model, with the code and mark information:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:        <launch:codeMark>
       C:          <launch:code validatorID="sample">
       C:            49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC</launch:code>
       C:          <mark:mark
       C:           xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
       C:           ...
       C:          </mark:mark>
       C:        </launch:codeMark>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 34]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension, following the "signed mark" validation
       model, with the signed mark information for a sunrise application:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:       type="application">
       C:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:        <smd:signedMark id="signedMark"
       C:         xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0">
       C:         ...
       C:        </smd:signedMark>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 35]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension, following the "signed mark" validation
       model, with the base64-encoded signed mark information:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:        <smd:encodedSignedMark
       C:         xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0">
       C:         ...
       C:        </smd:encodedSignedMark>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    3.3.2.  Claims Create Form

       The Claims Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name
       mapping [RFC5731] includes the information related to the
       registrant's acceptance of the claims notice.

       A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create>
       domain command.  The <launch:create> element has an OPTIONAL "type"
       attribute that defines the expected type of object ("application" or
       "registration") to create.  The server SHOULD validate the "type"
       attribute, when passed, against the type of object that will be
       created, and return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if the
       type is incorrect.  The <launch:create> element contains the
       following child elements:

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 36]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       <launch:phase>:  Contains the value of the active launch phase of the
           server.  The server SHOULD validate the value according to
           Section 2.3.

       <launch:notice>:  One or more <launch:notice> elements that contain
           the following child elements:

           <launch:noticeID>:  Unique notice identifier for the claims
               notice.  The <launch:noticeID> element has an OPTIONAL
               "validatorID" attribute that is used to define the Validator
               Identifier (Section 2.2); it's value indicates which
               Trademark Validator is the source of the claims notice, with
               the default being the ICANN TMCH.

           <launch:notAfter>:  Expiry of the claims notice.

           <launch:acceptedDate>:  Contains the date and time that the
               claims notice was accepted.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 37]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension with the <launch:notice> information for
       the "tmch" and the "custom-tmch" validators, for the "claims" launch
       phase:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:        <launch:phase>claims</launch:phase>
       C:        <launch:notice>
       C:          <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch">
       C:          370d0b7c9223372036854775807</launch:noticeID>
       C:          <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z
       C:          </launch:notAfter>
       C:          <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:00.0Z
       C:          </launch:acceptedDate>
       C:        </launch:notice>
       C:        <launch:notice>
       C:          <launch:noticeID validatorID="custom-tmch">
       C:          470d0b7c9223654313275808</launch:noticeID>
       C:          <launch:notAfter>2014-06-19T10:00:00.0Z
       C:          </launch:notAfter>
       C:          <launch:acceptedDate>2014-06-19T09:00:30.0Z
       C:          </launch:acceptedDate>
       C:        </launch:notice>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 38]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.3.3.  General Create Form

       The General Create Form of the extension to the EPP domain name
       mapping [RFC5731] includes the launch phase and optionally the object
       type to create.  The OPTIONAL "type" attribute defines the expected
       type of object ("application" or "registration") to create.  The
       server SHOULD validate the "type" attribute, when passed, against the
       type of object that will be created, and return an EPP error result
       code of 2306 [RFC5730] if the type is incorrect.

       A <launch:create> element is sent along with the regular <create>
       domain command.  The <launch:create> element contains the following
       child element:

       <launch:phase>:  Contains the value of the active launch phase of the
           server.  The server SHOULD validate the value according to
           Section 2.3.

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension for a "landrush" launch phase application:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:       type="application">
       C:        <launch:phase>landrush</launch:phase>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 39]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.3.4.  Mixed Create Form

       The Mixed Create Form supports a mix of the create forms where, for
       example, the Sunrise Create Form (Section 3.3.1) and the Claims
       Create Form (Section 3.3.2) MAY be supported in a single command by
       including both the verified trademark information and the information
       related to the registrant's acceptance of the claims notice.  The
       server MAY support the Mixed Create Form.  The "custom" launch phase
       SHOULD be used when using the Mixed Create Form.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 40]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <create> domain command using the
       <launch:create> extension, with a mix of the Sunrise Create Form
       (Section 3.3.1) and the Claims Create Form (Section 3.3.2), including
       both a mark and a notice:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domainone.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <launch:create
       C:       xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
       C:       type="application">
       C:        <launch:phase name="non-tmch-sunrise">custom</launch:phase>
       C:        <launch:codeMark>
       C:          <mark:mark
       C:            xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0">
       C:            ...
       C:          </mark:mark>
       C:        </launch:codeMark>
       C:        <launch:notice>
       C:          <launch:noticeID validatorID="tmch">
       C:            49FD46E6C4B45C55D4AC
       C:          </launch:noticeID>
       C:          <launch:notAfter>2012-06-19T10:00:10.0Z
       C:          </launch:notAfter>
       C:          <launch:acceptedDate>2012-06-19T09:01:30.0Z
       C:          </launch:acceptedDate>
       C:        </launch:notice>
       C:      </launch:create>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 41]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.3.5.  Create Response

       If the create was successful, the server MAY add a <launch:creData>
       element to the regular EPP <resData> to indicate that the server
       generated an Application Identifier (Section 2.1), when multiple
       applications of a given domain name are supported; otherwise, no
       extension is included with the regular EPP <resData>.  The
       <launch:creData> element contains the following child elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The phase of the application that mirrors the
           <launch:phase> element included in the <launch:create>.

       <launch:applicationID>:  The application identifier of the
           application.

       The following is an example response when multiple overlapping
       applications are supported by the server:

       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="1001">
       S:      <msg>Command completed successfully; action pending</msg>
       S:    </result>
       S:    <resData>
       S:      <domain:creData
       S:         xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       S:       <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       S:       <domain:crDate>2010-08-10T15:38:26.623854Z</domain:crDate>
       S:      </domain:creData>
       S:    </resData>
       S:    <extension>
       S:      <launch:creData
       S:        xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       S:        <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       S:        <launch:applicationID>2393-9323-E08C-03B1
       S:        </launch:applicationID>
       S:      </launch:creData>
       S:    </extension>
       S:    <trID>
       S:      <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       S:      <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:    </trID>
       S:  </response>
       S:</epp>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 42]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.4.  EPP <update> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <update>
       command to be used in conjunction with the domain name mapping.

       When an EPP <update> command with the extension is sent to a server
       that does not support Launch Applications, it will fail.  A server
       that does not support Launch Applications during its launch phase
       MUST return an EPP error result code of 2102 [RFC5730] when receiving
       an EPP <update> command with the extension.

       Registry policies permitting, clients may update an application
       object by submitting an EPP <update> command along with a
       <launch:update> element to indicate the application object to be
       updated.  The <launch:update> element contains the following child
       elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The phase during which the application was submitted
           or is associated with.  The server SHOULD validate the value and
           return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if it is
           invalid.

       <launch:applicationID>:  The application identifier for which the
           client wishes to update.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 43]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       The following is an example <update> domain command with the
       <launch:update> extension to add and remove a name server of a
       sunrise application with the application identifier "abc123":

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <update>
       C:      <domain:update
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:add>
       C:            <domain:ns>
       C:              <domain:hostObj>ns2.domain.example</domain:hostObj>
       C:            </domain:ns>
       C:          </domain:add>
       C:          <domain:rem>
       C:            <domain:ns>
       C:              <domain:hostObj>ns1.domain.example</domain:hostObj>
       C:            </domain:ns>
       C:          </domain:rem>
       C:      </domain:update>
       C:    </update>
       C:    <extension>
       C:    <launch:update
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:      <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:      <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
       C:    </launch:update>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       This extension does not define any extension to the response of an
       <update> domain command.  After processing the command, the server
       replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain
       name mapping [RFC5731].

    3.5.  EPP <delete> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <delete>
       command to be used in conjunction with the domain name mapping.

       A client MUST NOT pass the extension on an EPP <delete> command to a
       server that does not support Launch Applications.  A server that does

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 44]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       not support Launch Applications during its launch phase MUST return
       an EPP error result code of 2102 [RFC5730] when receiving an EPP
       <delete> command with the extension.

       Registry policies permitting, clients MAY withdraw an application by
       submitting an EPP <delete> command along with a <launch:delete>
       element to indicate the application object to be deleted.  The
       <launch:delete> element contains the following child elements:

       <launch:phase>:  The phase during which the application was submitted
           or is associated with.  The server SHOULD validate the value and
           return an EPP error result code of 2306 [RFC5730] if it is
           invalid.

       <launch:applicationID>:  The application identifier for which the
           client wishes to delete.

       The following is an example <delete> domain command with the
       <launch:delete> extension:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <delete>
       C:    <domain:delete
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>domain.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:delete>
       C:   </delete>
       C:   <extension>
       C:    <launch:delete
       C:     xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0">
       C:      <launch:phase>sunrise</launch:phase>
       C:      <launch:applicationID>abc123</launch:applicationID>
       C:    </launch:delete>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       This extension does not define any extension to the response of a
       <delete> domain command.  After processing the command, the server
       replies with a standard EPP response as defined in the EPP domain
       name mapping [RFC5731].

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 45]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    3.6.  EPP <renew> Command

       This extension does not define any extension to the EPP <renew>
       command or response described in the EPP domain name mapping
       [RFC5731].

    3.7.  EPP <transfer> Command

       This extension does not define any extension to the EPP <transfer>
       command or response described in the EPP domain name mapping
       [RFC5731].

    4.  Formal Syntax

       The EPP Launch Phase Mapping schema is presented in Section 4.1.

       The formal syntax presented 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.

    4.1.  Launch Schema

       Copyright (c) 2018 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

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 46]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
       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
       <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
       <schema
         targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
         xmlns:launch="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0"
         xmlns:eppcom="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"
         xmlns:mark="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"
         xmlns:smd="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"
         xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
         elementFormDefault="qualified">

         <!-- Import common element types -->
         <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eppcom-1.0"/>
         <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:mark-1.0"/>
         <import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:signedMark-1.0"/>

         <annotation>
           <documentation>
             Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0
             domain name
             extension schema
             for the launch phase processing.
           </documentation>
         </annotation>

         <!-- Child elements found in EPP commands -->
         <element
           name="check"
           type="launch:checkType"/>
         <element
           name="info"
           type="launch:infoType"/>
         <element
           name="create"
           type="launch:createType"/>
         <element
           name="update"
           type="launch:idContainerType"/>
         <element
           name="delete"

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 47]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

           type="launch:idContainerType"/>

         <!-- Common container of id (identifier) element -->
         <complexType name="idContainerType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="phase"
               type="launch:phaseType"/>
             <element
               name="applicationID"
               type="launch:applicationIDType"/>
           </sequence>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Definition for application identifier -->
         <simpleType name="applicationIDType">
           <restriction base="token"/>
         </simpleType>

         <!-- Definition for launch phase.  Name is an
              optional attribute used to extend the phase type.
              For example, when using the phase type value
              of "custom", the "name" can be used to specify the
              custom phase. -->
         <complexType name="phaseType">
           <simpleContent>
             <extension base="launch:phaseTypeValue">
               <attribute
                 name="name"
                 type="token"/>
             </extension>
           </simpleContent>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Enumeration of launch phase values -->
         <simpleType name="phaseTypeValue">
           <restriction base="token">
             <enumeration value="sunrise"/>
             <enumeration value="landrush"/>
             <enumeration value="claims"/>
             <enumeration value="open"/>
             <enumeration value="custom"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <!-- Definition for the sunrise code -->
         <simpleType name="codeValue">

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 48]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

           <restriction base="token">
             <minLength value="1"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <complexType name="codeType">
           <simpleContent>
             <extension base="launch:codeValue">
               <attribute
                 name="validatorID"
                 type="launch:validatorIDType"
                 use="optional"/>
             </extension>
           </simpleContent>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Definition for the notice identifier -->
         <simpleType name="noticeIDValue">
           <restriction base="token">
             <minLength value="1"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <complexType name="noticeIDType">
           <simpleContent>
             <extension base="launch:noticeIDValue">
               <attribute
                 name="validatorID"
                 type="launch:validatorIDType"
                 use="optional"/>
             </extension>
           </simpleContent>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Definition for the validator identifier -->
         <simpleType name="validatorIDType">
           <restriction base="token">
             <minLength value="1"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <!-- Possible status values for sunrise application -->
         <simpleType name="statusValueType">
           <restriction base="token">
             <enumeration value="pendingValidation"/>
             <enumeration value="validated"/>
             <enumeration value="invalid"/>
             <enumeration value="pendingAllocation"/>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 49]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

             <enumeration value="allocated"/>
             <enumeration value="rejected"/>
             <enumeration value="custom"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <!-- Status type definition -->
         <complexType name="statusType">
           <simpleContent>
             <extension base="normalizedString">
               <attribute
                 name="s"
                 type="launch:statusValueType"
                 use="required"/>
               <attribute
                 name="lang"
                 type="language"
                 default="en"/>
               <attribute
                 name="name"
                 type="token"/>
             </extension>
           </simpleContent>
         </complexType>

         <!-- codeMark Type that contains an optional
              code with mark information -->
         <complexType name="codeMarkType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="code"
               type="launch:codeType"
               minOccurs="0"/>
             <element
               ref="mark:abstractMark"
               minOccurs="0"/>
           </sequence>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Child elements for the create command -->
         <complexType name="createType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="phase"
               type="launch:phaseType"/>
             <choice minOccurs="0">
               <element
                 name="codeMark"

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 50]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

                 type="launch:codeMarkType"
                 maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
               <element
                 ref="smd:abstractSignedMark"
                 maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
               <element
                 ref="smd:encodedSignedMark"
                 maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
             </choice>
             <element
               name="notice"
               type="launch:createNoticeType"
               minOccurs="0"
               maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
           </sequence>
           <attribute
             name="type"
             type="launch:objectType"/>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Type of launch object -->
         <simpleType name="objectType">
           <restriction base="token">
             <enumeration value="application"/>
             <enumeration value="registration"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <!-- Child elements of the create notice element -->
         <complexType name="createNoticeType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="noticeID"
               type="launch:noticeIDType"/>
             <element
               name="notAfter"
               type="dateTime"/>
             <element
               name="acceptedDate"
               type="dateTime"/>
           </sequence>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Child elements of check (Claims Check Command) -->
         <complexType name="checkType">
           <sequence>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 51]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

             <element
               name="phase"
               type="launch:phaseType"
               minOccurs="0"/>
           </sequence>
           <attribute
             name="type"
             type="launch:checkFormType"
             default="claims"/>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Type of check form (Claims Check or Availability Check) -->
         <simpleType name="checkFormType">
           <restriction base="token">
             <enumeration value="claims"/>
             <enumeration value="avail"/>
             <enumeration value="trademark"/>
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

         <!-- Child elements of info command -->
         <complexType name="infoType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="phase"
               type="launch:phaseType"/>
             <element
               name="applicationID"
               type="launch:applicationIDType"
               minOccurs="0"/>
           </sequence>
           <attribute
             name="includeMark"
             type="boolean"
             default="false"/>
         </complexType>

         <!-- Child response elements -->
         <element
           name="chkData"
           type="launch:chkDataType"/>
         <element
           name="creData"
           type="launch:idContainerType"/>
         <element
           name="infData"

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 52]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

           type="launch:infDataType"/>

         <!-- <check> response elements -->
         <complexType name="chkDataType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="phase"
               type="launch:phaseType"
               minOccurs="0"/>
             <element
               name="cd"
               type="launch:cdType"
               maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
           </sequence>
         </complexType>

         <complexType name="cdType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="name"
               type="launch:cdNameType"/>
             <element
               name="claimKey"
               type="launch:claimKeyType"
               minOccurs="0"
               maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
           </sequence>
         </complexType>

         <complexType name="cdNameType">
           <simpleContent>
             <extension base="eppcom:labelType">
               <attribute
                 name="exists"
                 type="boolean"
                 use="required"/>
             </extension>
           </simpleContent>
         </complexType>

         <complexType name="claimKeyType">
           <simpleContent>
             <extension base="token">
               <attribute
                 name="validatorID"
                 type="launch:validatorIDType"
                 use="optional"/>
             </extension>

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 53]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

           </simpleContent>
         </complexType>

         <!-- <info> response elements -->
         <complexType name="infDataType">
           <sequence>
             <element
               name="phase"
               type="launch:phaseType"/>
             <element
               name="applicationID"
               type="launch:applicationIDType"
               minOccurs="0"/>
             <element
               name="status"
               type="launch:statusType"
               minOccurs="0"/>
             <element
               ref="mark:abstractMark"
               minOccurs="0"
               maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
           </sequence>
         </complexType>

       </schema>
       END

    5.  IANA Considerations

    5.1.  XML Namespace

       This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas
       conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688].

       IANA has registered the launch namespace as follows:

          URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0

          Registrant Contact: IESG

          XML: None.  Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 54]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       IANA has registered the launch XML schema as follows:

          URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:launch-1.0

          Registrant Contact: IESG

          XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document.

    5.2.  EPP Extension Registry

       IANA has registered the EPP extension described in this document in
       the "Extensions for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)"
       registry described in [RFC7451].  The details of the registration are
       as follows:

       Name of Extension: "Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible
       Provisioning Protocol (EPP)"

       Document Status: Standards Track

       Reference: RFC 8334

       Registrant Name and Email Address: IESG, <iesg@ietf.org>

       TLDs: Any

       IPR Disclosure: None

       Status: Active

       Notes: None

    6.  Security Considerations

       The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any
       security services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730], the EPP
       domain name mapping [RFC5731], and protocol layers used by EPP.  The
       security considerations described in these other specifications apply
       to this specification as well.

       Updates to, and deletion of, an application object MUST be restricted
       to clients authorized to perform the said operation on the object.

       Information contained within an application, or even the mere fact
       that an application exists, may be confidential.  Any attempt to
       operate on an application object by an unauthorized client MUST be
       rejected with an EPP 2201 (authorization error) return code.  Server
       policy may allow an <info> operation with filtered output by clients

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 55]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

       other than the sponsoring client, in which case the <domain:infData>
       and <launch:infData> responses SHOULD be filtered to include only
       fields that are publicly accessible.

    7.  References

    7.1.  Normative References

       [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                  Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
                  DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

       [RFC3688]  Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
                  DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.

       [RFC5646]  Phillips, A., Ed. and M. Davis, Ed., "Tags for Identifying
                  Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, DOI 10.17487/RFC5646,
                  September 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5646>.

       [RFC5730]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
                  STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.

       [RFC5731]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
                  Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731,
                  DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5731>.

       [RFC7848]  Lozano, G., "Mark and Signed Mark Objects Mapping",
                  RFC 7848, DOI 10.17487/RFC7848, June 2016,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7848>.

       [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
                  2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
                  May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

       [W3C.REC-xml11-20060816]
                  Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E.,
                  Yergeau, F., and J. Cowan, "Extensible Markup Language
                  (XML) 1.1 (Second Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium
                  Recommendation REC-xml11-20060816, August 2006,
                  <http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml11-20060816>.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 56]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    7.2.  Informative References

       [ICANN-TMCH]
                  Lozano, G., "ICANN TMCH functional specifications", Work
                  in Progress, draft-ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-03, July
                  2017.

       [RFC7451]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for the Extensible
                  Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451,
                  February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>.

    Acknowledgements

       The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts of the leading
       participants of the Community TMCH Model that led to many of the
       changes to this document, which include Chris Wright, Jeff Neuman,
       Jeff Eckhaus, and Will Shorter.

       Special suggestions that have been incorporated into this document
       were provided by Harald Alvestrand, Ben Campbell, Spencer Dawkins,
       Jothan Frakes, Keith Gaughan, Seth Goldman, Scott Hollenbeck, Michael
       Holloway, Jan Jansen, Rubens Kuhl, Mirja Kuehlewind, Warren Kumari,
       Ben Levac, Gustavo Lozano, Klaus Malorny, Alexander Mayrhofer, Alexey
       Melnikov, Patrick Mevzek, James Mitchell, Francisco Obispo, Mike
       O'Connell, Eric Rescorla, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer, Sabrina Tanamal,
       Trung Tran, Ulrich Wisser, and Sharon Wodjenski.

       Some of the description of the Trademark Claims Phase was based on
       the work done by Gustavo Lozano in the ICANN TMCH functional
       specifications.

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 57]

    RFC 8334              Launch Phase Mapping for EPP            March 2018

    Authors' Addresses

       James Gould
       VeriSign, Inc.
       12061 Bluemont Way
       Reston, VA  20190
       United States of America

       Email: jgould@verisign.com
       URI:   http://www.verisign.com

       Wil Tan
       Cloud Registry
       Suite 32 Seabridge House
       377 Kent St
       Sydney, NSW  2000
       Australia

       Phone: +61 414 710899
       Email: wil@cloudregistry.net
       URI:   http://www.cloudregistry.net

       Gavin Brown
       CentralNic Ltd
       35-39 Mooregate
       London, England  EC2R 6AR
       United Kingdom

       Phone: +44 20 33 88 0600
       Email: gavin.brown@centralnic.com
       URI:   https://www.centralnic.com

    Gould, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 58]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/