Re: [sitefinder-tech-discuss] Pseudo code please

[Mo McKinlay <mo.mckinlay@cirrus-multimedia.ltd.uk>]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 03:52:47PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:

> Cool... I guess what is needed is a comment on the applicable RFC that
> reads something like:
> 
> The operator of a ZONE which contains NS records for delegated sub-zones
> within that ZONE MUST NOT incorporate wildcard records into that ZONE
> without the consent of the overwhelming (>80%) majority of the points
> of authority subsidiary to said zone.
> 
> The operator of a ZONE of public trust (.edu, .org, .com, .net) which
> is operating it on behalf of ICANN/IANA in the best interests of the
> internet MUST NOT make changes to the ZONE other than as prescribed
> by ICANN/IANA.  This does not apply to sponsored TLDs where ICANN/IANA
> has turned exclusive governance of those ZONES over to the ZONE holder
> and such governance was established within the first 3 years of operation
> of said ZONE.

Seems reasonable, though I'd suggest it's more of a BCP than anything else.

Mind you, I'd be tempted to suggest that .edu, .org, .com and .net be
'locked down' from this point onwards -- given their mass and expected
behaviour. Given the increasing reliancing on the Internet, the cost of
these sorts of changes to organisations involved in Internet infrastructure
is only going to increase, and I'm not sure anybody is really fully aware of
the consequences of imposing these costs, let alone the changes themselves.
Anybody who believes the changes required to "cope" with a wildcard A record
in .COM are "trivial" is living in cloud-cuckoo land.

Mo.

-- 
E: mo.mckinlay@cmlx.co.uk
T: +44 (0) 709 200 3083
W: http://cmlx.co.uk/


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/unsubscribe>