In message <[email protected]>, Matthias-Christian Ott writes:
> On 2015-09-03 00:33, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > This UPDATE only server would take less than a day to write.
> > 
> >     open listening sockets
> > 
> >     parse message
> > 
> >     check for signature - return NOTIMP if not found.
> > 
> >     check ZONE section for sanity
> > 
> >     look at first name in UPDATE section to determine registrar
> > 
> >     forward update using a per registrar txid space for TSIG
> >     so you can de-mux replies.
> > 
> >     forward update using same txid for SIG(0) ensuring that
> >     you don't have multiple txid outstanding on the same socket
> >     so you can de-mux replies.
> > 
> >     relay reply fixing restoring txid for TSIG.
> > 
> > Named does all this for UPDATE when running as a slave with
> > update-forwarding enabled, with the exception of looking up the
> > registrar, so this is *nothing* new.  You are looking at 16 year
> > old code paths here.
> 
> Still the registrar would have to implement the translation from DNS
> updates to EPP messages. I wouldn't say that this is impossible to
> implement in PHP (sadly that's how most registrars work) but it's not
> easy. Moreover, there has to be customer demand or another incentive for
> a registrar to implement it.
> 
> - Matthias-Christian

Given that a number of registrars provide a collection of different
adhoc tools to do this there is a demand, just not standardisation.
By not standardizing they are creating registrar lock-in.

ICANN, under its charter to encourage competition, should be pushing
for this as lock-in discourages real competition.

> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to