Moin! This may be totally in appropriate
On 6 Nov 2015, at 0:54, Mark Andrews wrote: > I keep getting told the IETF can't tell people what to do > but that is *exactly* what we do do when we issue a BCP. > We tell people what best current practice is and ask them > to follow it. > > Today we have TLDs that do perform all sorts of checks on > servers they delegate zones to and some do inform the > operators of those zones that they have errors. Those > checks cover in part tests described in > draft-andrews-dns-no-response-issue. Really TLDs doing repeated checks? I know some do when you register domains, but repeatedly? Examples? > So do we adopt this or do we continue to lie to ourselves > about what BCP actually do? They recommend something. The problems is when your recommendations are interfering with business or policy aspects which this draft clearly does: "If repeated attempts to inform and get the customer to correct / replace the faulty server are unsuccessful the TLD operator shall remove all delegations to said server from the zone." <cynic mode=on> So you are telling TLD to spend money for checks that will decrease there revenue. TLDs make money by registering domains. The don't make money by running DNS, that is cost. </cynic mode> I know that a lot of TLDs go to great lengths running a good DNS service and have sensible policies for there registrars to run a good DNS service also, and the above comments are not for them, but some people only look at the money. So long -Ralf _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
