Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

xml misses object namespace in domain and contact xml #1

Open
omcnet opened this issue Aug 28, 2013 · 4 comments
Open

xml misses object namespace in domain and contact xml #1

omcnet opened this issue Aug 28, 2013 · 4 comments

Comments

@omcnet
Copy link

omcnet commented Aug 28, 2013

According to rfc5730-5732 elements below the specific command tag should have
the object type as namespace:

RFC example:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> <epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> <command> <check> <obj:check xmlns:obj="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:obj"> <obj:name>example1</obj:name> [...] </obj:check> </check> [...] </command> </epp>

Currently the domain and contact objects create xml without the
"obj" namespace. This causes xml validation errors with various registries.

According to rfc 5731 the domain check xml should look like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> <epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0"> <command> <check> <domain:check xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"> <domain:name>example.com</domain:name> <domain:name>example.net</domain:name> [...] </domain:check> </check> <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID> </command> </epp>

@omcnet
Copy link
Author

omcnet commented Sep 12, 2014

Is this project still alive?

@ernestothorp
Copy link

I've pulled request on this issue, but there's no word from them since then.
I'm thinking on pushing my own gem.

@omcnet
Copy link
Author

omcnet commented Sep 15, 2014

I have seen that.
I would appreciate a fork, that still gets updates and maintenance.

@ernestothorp
Copy link

Take a look at https://github.com/ernestothorp/epp-client
If you need something else let me known.
I think they will not approve the pull request of my fork, because the didn't followed all the specs from the RFC

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants