Stéphane
Apologies in spades! I knew that.
There is a lot of personal networking involved at the TLD level
as I understand it from discussions over the years with various operators. And
from years of operations, this feels like there are steps in the transfer processes
that require too many human fingers involved. I guess we will see next year as
it rolls out. My predictions is still that we will need some new capabilities
to allow technology to take over more of the basic operational processes in
both the transfers and the new TLD operations as they scale up.
One of my other worries is that DNS and BGP are both standouts
as being weak links in the Internet infrastructure without even including
security. And as is, the lack of adequately defined interoperability in our
key security protocols; IPSec, IKE, IKEv2, DNSSec, PKI in both IPv4 and IPv6
makes both DNS and BGP hard to secure and will be challenging to deploy in a
fully heterogeneous vendor infrastructure. We are pushing for the IETF to work
this issue more aggressively.
Take care
Terry
From: Stéphane Van Gelder
[mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 2:37 AM
To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'GNSO Council'
Subject: Re: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example...
Terry,
It’s “Stephane”, the French spelling of Stefan if you prefer
;-)
As for the transfer problem you raise, I still don’t understand why you
are linking this to broader issues such as those described in your email. A
registrar to registrar transfer is more dependent on the quality of the
registrars handling it than on the number of TLDs around. There is no personal
networking involved and a achieving a successful domain name transfer from one
registrar to another in a specific TLD has absolutely nothing to do with the
number of other TLDs out there.
Thanks,
Stéphane.
Le 27/04/09 20:11, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
Stephanie
Exactly!
There will just be the potential for many more of this type of operational
process issues to occur and thus we will need to watch and see what areas of
DNS services and protocol technologies to push the IETF to change/improve since
the type of “personal networking” that helps with day-to-day
operations today won’t be as usable/workable as the number of TLD’s
and IDN-TLDs grow.
Take care
Terry
From: Stéphane Van Gelder
[mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 9:42 AM
To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'GNSO Council'
Subject: Re: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example...
Hi Terry,
I don’t see any example of fundamental operational difficulties linked
with TLDs in the example your describe.
All I see is a mismanaged domain name transfer from one registrar to another...
Stéphane
Le 27/04/09 18:28, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
a écrit :
All
Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were
with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect an
example not to share!
If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org>
right now. Some of you all will get “cannot find web server”!
I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end
of the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasn’t
actually down and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine
(which won’t even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in
IPv6). But it didn’t resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from
Seattle.
They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and
had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs.
TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via “personal
contacts” as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD
operators globally. Our technology will need to significantly improve to
insure coordination and security between what will be a growing number of TLD
and IDN-TLD operators; and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical
complexity.
Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney.
Take care
Terry