Network Working Group E. Skoglund Internet-Draft The Swedish Internet Foundation Intended status: Standards Track S. Kämpf Expires: 1 January 2027 DENIC 30 June 2026 Registry Lock Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) draft-skoglund-epp-registry-lock-00 Abstract This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extension for setting and managing a registry lock on a domain object. TO BE REMOVED: This document is being collaborated on in Github at: https://github.com/EricIO/draft-regext-epp-registry-lock (https://github.com/EricIO/draft-regext-epp-registry-lock). The most recent working version of the document, open issues, etc. should all be available there. The authors (gratefully) accept pull requests. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on 1 January 2027. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2026 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 Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 1] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.2. Registry Lock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2.1. Registry Lock Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2.2. Status Values for Locked Domains . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2.3. Adding a registry lock to a domain . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2.4. Handling changes to an associated contact object . . 5 1.2.5. Handling changes to a locked domain . . . . . . . . . 5 1.3. Extension Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.3.1. The element . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.3.2. The element . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.4. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.4.1. EPP Query Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.4.2. EPP Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.4.3. EPP Transform Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.5. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1. Introduction A registry lock secures a domain from any unauthorized changes to it on the registry level as opposed to the registrar level. It is targeted primarily at high value, business critical domains, where holders value the benefits of the increased security of business- critical domains over the risks of unauthorized or unwanted changes to their domains. This document describes an EPP extension to the domain object mapping ([RFC5731]) that allows a sponsoring client to manage registry locked domains automatically. 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. Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 2] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 In this document's examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and white space in these examples are provided only to illustrate element relationships and are not required features of this protocol. 1.2. Registry Lock Many registries provide registrants for a way to add protection to their domains by locking them at the registry level. By locking a domain a registrant ensures that any changes (except for renewing the domain) are verified by the registry before going into effect. As of yet there have been no standardized process for for a registry lock and registries that provide it have come up with different processes, most including some level of manual intervention. While a domain that has registry lock enabled on it needs authorization for any changes made to it a registry MAY allow changes bypassing the authorization via automated DNSSEC provisioning, for example using a CDSS/CSYNC scanner. The removal of a registry lock is a manual, operational procedure and is not coveredd in this specification. In this document, we define an EPP extension that enables registries and registrars to further automate the registry lock process. 1.2.1. Registry Lock Contact A registry lock contact is a contact connected to a domain object that is able to authorize changes to the object. A domain MAY have multiple registry lock contacts, in which case changes MAY need to be authorized by multiple registry lock contacts. A server MAY restrict the maximum number of registry lock contacts connected to a domain. 1.2.2. Status Values for Locked Domains Once a registry lock has been applied on a domain object the object MUST have the serverDeleteProhibited status value set on it. While a transform request is pending authorization, the serverPendingUpdate status MUST be set on the domain. Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 3] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 1.2.3. Adding a registry lock to a domain When a registry lock is set on a domain a server MUST respond with a result code oc 1001 as defined in section 3 of [RFC5730]. A server must then await for authorization as set out by the registry lock contact parameters provided. If the command is authorized within the specified deadline a server MUST send a poll message indicating the successfull transform. Example poll message indicating success: S: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Setting registry lock on domain succeeded. S: S: S: S: example.com S: update S: 12345-XYZ S: S: S: rl01 S: S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: If a transform is not authorized within the deadline a server MUST send a poll message indicating the failure of the transform. Example poll message indicating failure: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 4] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 S: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Update of locked domain failed. S: S: S: S: example.com S: update S: 12345-XYZ S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: 1.2.4. Handling changes to an associated contact object Updates to a contact object that is associated as a registry lock contact for a domain object MUST be rejected. If an update command for a contact object associated with a locked domain is processed successfully, a server MUST respond with a result code of 2305 as defined in section 3 of [RFC5730]. 1.2.5. Handling changes to a locked domain If an update command for a locked domain is processed successfully, a server MUST respond with a result code of 1001 as defined in section 3 of [RFC5730], to indicate that the transform is awaiting authorization to be completed. If a transform command is authorized within the specified deadline a server MUST send a poll message indicating the successfull transform. Example poll message indicating success: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 5] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 S: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Update of locked domain succeeded. S: S: S: S: example.com S: update S: 12345-XYZ S: S: S: rl01 S: S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: If a transform is not authorized within the deadline a server MUST send a poll message indicating the failure of the transform. Example poll message indicating failure: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 6] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 S: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully; ack to dequeue S: S: S: S: 2013-10-22T14:25:57.0Z S: Update of locked domain failed. S: S: S: S: example.com S: update S: 12345-XYZ S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54321-XYZ S: S: S: 1.3. Extension Elements This extension adds additional elements to the EPP domain mapping. 1.3.1. The element The element contains the following elements: * One OPTIONAL element that contains the timeout for which after any operation will fail. A server MAY restrict the allowed values. * One OPTIONAL element that contains a positive non-zero integer that sets the number of registy lock contacts that MUST authorize the domain changes for it to be approved. A server MAY restrict the number of registry lock contacts a domain object can have. Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 7] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 1.3.2. The element The element contains the following elements: * the contact identifier. * An OPTIONAL the method used by the registry lock contact to authorize changes. A server MAY restrict the allowed values. 1.3.2.1. Well known values A server MAY allow any value for the element the following values have a well known definition: * email - The contact will receive an email with further instructions. * text - The contact will receive a text message with further instructions. * letter - The contact will receive a postal letter with further instructions. * phone - The contact will receive a phone call with further instructions. * token - The contact will be provided means to send a token to the server for authorizing changes. 1.4. EPP Command Mapping 1.4.1. EPP Query Commands 1.4.1.1. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or response described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. 1.4.1.2. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. However, additional elements are defined for the response. An example response for a domain object with no pending updates: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 8] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully S: S: S: S: example.com S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: S: jd1234 S: sh8013 S: sh8013 S: S: ns1.example.com S: ns2.example.com S: S: ns1.example.com S: ns2.example.com S: ClientX S: ClientY S: 1999-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: ClientX S: 1999-12-03T09:00:00.0Z S: 2005-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: 2000-04-08T09:00:00.0Z S: S: 2fooBAR S: S: S: S: S: S: S: 1h S: 2 S: S: S: S: rl1001 S: email S: S: S: rl1002 Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 9] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 S: email S: S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54322-XYZ S: S: S: An example response for a domain with pending updates: S: S: S: S: S: Command completed successfully S: S: S: S: example.com S: EXAMPLE1-REP S: S: jd1234 S: sh8013 S: sh8013 S: S: ns1.example.com S: ns2.example.com S: S: ns1.example.com S: ns2.example.com S: ClientX S: ClientY S: 1999-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: ClientX S: 1999-12-03T09:00:00.0Z S: 2005-04-03T22:00:00.0Z S: 2000-04-08T09:00:00.0Z S: S: 2fooBAR S: S: S: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 10] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 S: S: S: S: 1h S: 2 S: S: S: S: rl1001 S: email S: S: S: rl1002 S: email S: S: S: S: S: foo S: rl1001 S: rl1002 S: S: S: S: S: S: ABC-12345 S: 54322-XYZ S: S: S: 1.4.2. EPP Command This extension does not add any elements to the EPP command or responses as described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. 1.4.3. EPP Transform Commands EPP provides five commands to transform objects: to create an instance of an object, to delete an instance of an object, to extend the validity period of an object, to manage object sponsorship changes, and to change information associated with an object. Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 11] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 1.4.3.1. EPP Command This extension defines additional elements for the EPP command described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. No additional elements are defined for the EPP response. C: C: C: C: C: C: allocation.example C: jd1234 C: sh8013 C: sh8013 C: C: 2fooBAR C: C: C: C: C: C: C: 1h C: C: C: C: rc101 C: email C: C: C: C: C: ABC-12345 C: C: 1.4.3.2. EPP Command 1.4.3.2.1. Domain Objects This extension does not define any additional elements to the EPP command or responses described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. However if a server recieves a command for a domain object with registry lock set it MUST be rejected. Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 12] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 1.4.3.2.2. Contact Objects This extension does not define any additional elements to the EPP command or responses described in the EPP contact mapping [RFC5733]. However if a server recieves a command for a contact object associated as a registry lock contact with a domain object it MUST be rejected. 1.4.3.3. EPP Command This extension does not define any additional elements to the EPP command or responses described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. 1.4.3.4. EPP Command This extension does not define any additional elements to the EPP command or responses described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. 1.4.3.5. EPP Command This extension defines additional elements for the EPP command described in the EPP domain mapping [RFC5731]. No additional elements are defined for the EPP response. The EPP command provides a transform operation that allows a client to modify the attributes of a domain object. In addition to the EPP command elements described in the EPP domain mapping, the command MUST contain an element, and the element MUST contain a child element that identifies the extension namespace if the client wants to update the domain object with data defined in this extension. The element contains a to add registry lock contacts to a domain, a to remove registry lock contacts from a domain, or a element to change policy information or a registry lock contacts authorization method. At least one , , or element MUST be provided. A or MUST only contain elements as child elements. An example update command changing policy data: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 13] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 C: C: C: C: C: C: example.com C: C: C: C: C: C: C: 3h C: C: C: C: C: ABC-12345 C: C: An example update command adding and removing registry lock contacts: Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 14] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 C: C: C: C: C: C: example.com C: C: C: C: C: C: C: rl1003 C: email C: C: C: rl1004 C: email C: C: C: C: C: rl1001 C: C: C: C: C: ABC-12345 C: C: 1.5. Formal Syntax 2. Normative References [RFC5731] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731, DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009, . [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 15] Internet-Draft EPP Registry Lock June 2026 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . [RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009, . [RFC5733] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Contact Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5733, DOI 10.17487/RFC5733, August 2009, . Authors' Addresses Eric Skoglund The Swedish Internet Foundation Email: eric.skoglund@internetstiftelsen.se Sascha Kämpf DENIC Email: kaempf@denic.de Skoglund & Kämpf Expires 1 January 2027 [Page 16]