[162348] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Quad-A records in Network Solutions ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Brunner-Williams)
Tue Apr 9 19:48:55 2013
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:48:36 -0700
From: Eric Brunner-Williams <brunner@nic-naa.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20130409232335.44152322F977@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Reply-To: ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 4/9/13 4:23 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> It's about time certification was lost for failure to handle AAAA
> records. The same should also apply for DS records.
You can suggest this to the compliance team. It seems to me (registrar
hat == "on") that in 2.5 years time, when Staff next conducts a
registrar audit, that this is a reasonable expectation of an
accreditation holding contracted party. It simply needs to be added to
the base RAA agreement.
Joe _may_ be in a position to encourage the compliance team to develop
a metric and a test mechanism, but at present, the compliance team
appears to be capable of WHOIS:43 harvesting (via Kent's boxen) and
occasional WHOIS:80 scraping, and little else beyond records
reconciliation for a limited sample. NB, investing equal oversight
labor in all current (and former) RAA holders is (a) a significant
duplication of effort for little possible benefit where shell
registrars are concerned, and (b) treats registrars (and their
registrants' interests in fair dealing) with a few hundreds of domains
and registrars (and their registrants' interests) with 10% or more of
the total gTLD registry market indifferently by policy and enforcement
tool design. The latter means most registrants (those with performance
contracts from registrars with 10% market share) receive several
orders of magnitude less contractual oversight protections than
registrants using registrars with a few hundred "names under management".
IMHO, that's a problem that could be fixed.
Eric
