[Dnssec-deployment] dealing with broken TLD name servers
joe.abley at icann.org
Tue Jun 29 22:02:21 EDT 2010
On 2010-06-29, at 21:40, "Mark Andrews" <marka at isc.org> wrote:
> Is basic RFC compliance even part of the ICANN/IANA agreements for
> TLD's. I had a quick look for it once but couldn't find it but did
> find lots of "you must accept a update in X seconds" style stuff.
All the gTLD agreements are public, as far as I know, and published on the icann web page.
It's far, far beyond my understanding of the realpolitik to comment on what agreements and commitments ought to exist between ICANN and ccTLDs.
You might consider whether "RFC compliance" actually means anything in any practical, never mind legal, sense. Even relatively modern documents published in the RFC series are filled with bad ideas that were never implemented; documents of the vintage of 1033/1034/1035 even more so.
I am all in favour of injecting operational reality and good old-fashioned hygiene into today's policy framework where it seems that improvements could be made, but understand that standing in the wings shouting "RFC!" bitterly is not actually going to make the world a better place.
> One would think that basic RFC compliance would be part of the agreement
> but the almighty dollar seems to rule over having thing work properly.
Like it or not there is a commercial industry surrounding the operation of the DNS, something that even you and I, working for non-profit companies, probably can be thankful for if we enjoy being paid.
More information about the Dnssec-deployment