Skip to content

Normalize Fee extension XML tags in EPP response#2953

Open
weiminyu wants to merge 1 commit intogoogle:masterfrom
weiminyu:epp-namespace-norm
Open

Normalize Fee extension XML tags in EPP response#2953
weiminyu wants to merge 1 commit intogoogle:masterfrom
weiminyu:epp-namespace-norm

Conversation

@weiminyu
Copy link
Collaborator

@weiminyu weiminyu commented Feb 3, 2026

Nomulus currently supports multiple versions of the Fee extensions. Our current tooling requires that each version must use a unique namespace tag, e.g., fee11, fee12, etc.

Some client registrars are sensitive to the tag literal used by the version of the extension they use. For example, a few registrars currently using v0.6 have requested that the fee literal be used on the versions they currently use. With registrars upgrading at their own schedule, this kind of requests are impossible to satisfy.

This PR instroduces a namespace normalizer class for EPP responses. The key optimization is that each EPP response never mixes multiple versions of a service extension. Therefore we can define a canonical tag for each extension, and change the tag of the extension in use in a response to that. This normalizer only handles Fee extensions right now, but the idea can be extended to others if use cases come up.

This normalizer will be applied to all flows in a future PR.


This change is Reviewable

@weiminyu weiminyu requested review from CydeWeys and gbrodman February 3, 2026 16:57

@ParameterizedTest
@MethodSource("provideTestCombinations")
void success_withFeeExtension(String name, String inputXmlFilename, String expectedXmlFilename)

Check notice

Code scanning / CodeQL

Useless parameter Note test

The parameter 'name' is never used.
Nomulus currently supports multiple versions of the Fee extensions. Our
current tooling requires that each version must use a unique namespace
tag, e.g., fee11, fee12, etc.

Some client registrars are sensitive to the tag literal used by the
version of the extension they use. For example, a few registrars
currently using v0.6 have requested that the `fee` literal be used
on the versions they currently use. With registrars upgrading at their
own schedule, this kind of requests are impossible to satisfy.

This PR instroduces a namespace normalizer class for EPP responses. The
key optimization is that each EPP response never mixes multiple versions
of a service extension. Therefore we can define a canonical tag for each
extension, and change the tag of the extension in use in a response to
that. This normalizer only handles Fee extensions right now, but the
idea can be extended to others if use cases come up.

This normalizer will be applied to all flows in a future PR.
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@weiminyu weiminyu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@weiminyu resolved 2 discussions.
Reviewable status: 0 of 10 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @CydeWeys and @gbrodman).

Copy link
Member

@CydeWeys CydeWeys left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@CydeWeys made 2 comments.
Reviewable status: 0 of 10 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @gbrodman and @weiminyu).


core/src/main/java/google/registry/flows/FeeExtensionXmlTagNormalizer.java line 55 at r2 (raw file):

 *
 * <p>Some registrars are not XML namespace-aware and rely on the XML tags being specific literals.
 * This makes it impossible to perform seamless rollout of new versions. Nomulus and the all

Grammar error here


core/src/main/java/google/registry/flows/FeeExtensionXmlTagNormalizer.java line 63 at r2 (raw file):

 * versions from the message, thus freeing up the canonical tag ('fee') for the active version.
 */
public class FeeExtensionXmlTagNormalizer {

What are the performance implications of this approach? This is running a nontrivial amount of XML parsing code for each command response we return, right?

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants