The ccTLD nameserver brouhaha continues. ICANN has now responded both to Elizabeth Porteneuve's proposed Names Council Resolution, which complained of ICANN's failure, after the recent bankruptcy of KPNQwest, to update a number of European ccTLD nameservers unless those TLDs gave IANA access to their zone files, and calling on ICANN to take immediate actions to update ccTLD name servers entries," and to Danny Younger's charge that ICANN was "in the process of blackmailing the ccTLD community." In a message to Younger, Stuart Lynn asserts that "there is no threat to Internet stability." And in a letter to the Names Council, Lynn and Vint Cerf suggest that the questions "regarding the IANA practice of obtaining and reviewing TLD zone files at the time of changes in the nameservers listed for the TLD in the root zone . . . suggest to us that it would be productive to re-examine the objectives for this practice and to consider alternative means by which those objectives might be reached."
The Lynn-Cerf letter acknowledges that "DNS data accuracy continues to be an important, and by some measures increasingly urgent, goal," citing recent Men & Mice Domain Health Surveys that have reported "surprisingly high performance error rates in reviews of subdomains within various TLDs." It also acknowledges that IANA denied nameserver change requests from "four TLD managers" because those managers "denied the IANA download access to the zone files for their TLDs." Referring to this "unfortunate standoff situation that, perversely, frustrates attempts to locate and correct TLD configuration errors, and at the same time potentially introduces additional DNS data errors through configuration mismatches between the DNS data in the root zone (which remains unchanged) and the affected TLD zones," they have proposed asking "the Committee on Security and Stability (SAC) to look into the matter and to develop a longer-term recommendation as to what would be the most sound technical practices to follow to promote better DNS stability; and to provide an interim recommendation while the broader issues are being explored." Sounds like an idea whose time has come . . .
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.