Subject: Re: Deployment of standards compliant nameservers Date: Wed, May 22,
2013 at 12:29:58PM +0000 Quoting Yoav Nir (ynir(_at_)checkpoint(_dot_)com):
Seems like a tough sell to me.
Not worse than BCP38 ;-)
OTOH, I have _personally_ done this. I introduced and enforced and got set
into policy that name servers hosting domains under .SE should actually
have the domain set up and working before we (I was at the registry then,
performing transfers between DNS hosting providers and similar work,
all very manual and pre-web 1.0) transfered the domain delegation to
the new set of servers.
I got yelled at quite a lot, but a lot of domain name holders
approved. Mostly the anger was from lazy hosting companies that didn't
mind having their customers with flapping delegations for a week.
It can be done, it won't be popular, but the side effects are good. Mostly.
Due to <some pressure from someone> this policy has been discontinued. I
am not responsible anymore.
OTTH, I think Marks proposal has some merit. I have a pretty good idea
where this comes from, but I think that we -- mostly -- have the tools
in 1591, and other documents.
OTFH, this won't help until the people shelling out money and other
resources to build and run infrastructure start paying attention.
The grunt work to be made here is mostly about making certain people
know that they should request compliance with the actual standards and
not a subset conveniently fitting the preselected candidate.
It is unclear to me whether people who are not reading the present set
of standards will start reading and paying attention this time around.
--
Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668
I'm GLAD I remembered to XEROX all my UNDERSHIRTS!!
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature