In message <[email protected]>, Doug Barton writes: > On 10/08/2013 01:22 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > > In many regulatory environments (the polite way of saying where ICANN > > says "No!") > > Just FYI, it's not ICANN that says no. It's the registrars who do not > want ANY channel of communication with their customers that does not go > through them. ICANN simply provides a context around which to solidify > the agreed upon relationships contractually.
So TLD's should no longer answer DNS requests from any Registrant? Yes that is a CHANNEL OF COMMUNICATION. Providing a relay agent is no different to providing a nameserver in term of interacting with the Registrant. It is not direct acceptance of updates. The Registrar is still the gating entity. This is machine to machine not person to person which is what the intent of the agreement of no communication is about. > > the *registrar* will fetch the CDS / CDNSKEY and will > > push the updated records into the *registry* through existing > > mechanisms (like EPP). > > Right, so instead of convincing hundreds of registries you're going to > convince thousands of registrars? And you've had exactly how much > interest from them? > > Doug > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
