[registrars] PIR's RRP implementation

[Mike Lampson <lampson@iaregistry.com>]

All:

Is anyone else but me having trouble communicating to PIR that their RRP
implementation is not compatible with VeriSign and that this is
unacceptable?  Their tech support staff have a tendency to quote the error
code definitions from RFC 2832 which is completely unhelpful.

The latest issue is that "renew" will not work if a domain is on
REGISTRAR-LOCK or REGISTRAR-HOLD.  (See RRP log below.)

In addition, they will not allow us to add REGISTRAR-HOLD to a domain that
already has REGISTRAR-LOCK.  Again, this is incompatible with VeriSign's RRP
implementation.

Mike Lampson
The Registry at Info Avenue, LLC
lampson@iaregistry.com

>12:13:42 - - RRP client: status<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: EntityName:Domain<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: DomainName:XXXXXXXXXXXX.ORG<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: .<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: 200 Command completed successfully<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: created by:xxxx-YY<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: created date:2001-02-01 00:50:22<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: nameserver:dns2.compeng.net<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: nameserver:dns1.compeng.net<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: registrar:xxxx-YY<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: registration expiration date:2003-02-01
00:50:22<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: status:REGISTRAR-LOCK<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: updated by:xxxx-YY<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP server: updated date:2002-04-19 20:04:01<crlf>

>12:13:42 - - RRP client: renew<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: EntityName:Domain<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: -Period:1<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: -CurrentExpirationYear:2003<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: DomainName:XXXXXXXXXXXX.ORG<crlf>
>12:13:42 - - RRP client: .<crlf>
>12:13:43 - - RRP server: 552 Domain status does not allow for
operation<crlf>