TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example...
All Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect an example not to share! If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org right now. Some of you all will get "cannot find web server"! I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end of the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasn't actually down and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine (which won't even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in IPv6). But it didn't resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from Seattle. They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs. TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via "personal contacts" as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD operators globally. Our technology will need to significantly improve to insure coordination and security between what will be a growing number of TLD and IDN-TLD operators; and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical complexity. Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney. Take care Terry
Hi Terry, I don¹t see any example of fundamental operational difficulties linked with TLDs in the example your describe. All I see is a mismanaged domain name transfer from one registrar to another... Stéphane Le 27/04/09 18:28, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@speakeasy.net> a écrit :
All
Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect an example not to share!
If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org> right now. Some of you all will get ³cannot find web server²!
I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end of the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasn¹t actually down and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine (which won¹t even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in IPv6). But it didn¹t resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from Seattle.
They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs.
TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via ³personal contacts² as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD operators globally. Our technology will need to significantly improve to insure coordination and security between what will be a growing number of TLD and IDN-TLD operators; and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical complexity.
Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney.
Take care Terry
Stephanie Exactly! There will just be the potential for many more of this type of operational process issues to occur and thus we will need to watch and see what areas of DNS services and protocol technologies to push the IETF to change/improve since the type of personal networking that helps with day-to-day operations today wont be as usable/workable as the number of TLDs and IDN-TLDs grow. Take care Terry From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 9:42 AM To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'GNSO Council' Subject: Re: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example... Hi Terry, I dont see any example of fundamental operational difficulties linked with TLDs in the example your describe. All I see is a mismanaged domain name transfer from one registrar to another... Stéphane Le 27/04/09 18:28, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@speakeasy.net> a écrit : All Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect an example not to share! If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org> right now. Some of you all will get cannot find web server! I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end of the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasnt actually down and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine (which wont even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in IPv6). But it didnt resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from Seattle. They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs. TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via personal contacts as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD operators globally. Our technology will need to significantly improve to insure coordination and security between what will be a growing number of TLD and IDN-TLD operators; and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical complexity. Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney. Take care Terry
Terry, It¹s ³Stephane², the French spelling of Stefan if you prefer ;-) As for the transfer problem you raise, I still don¹t understand why you are linking this to broader issues such as those described in your email. A registrar to registrar transfer is more dependent on the quality of the registrars handling it than on the number of TLDs around. There is no personal networking involved and a achieving a successful domain name transfer from one registrar to another in a specific TLD has absolutely nothing to do with the number of other TLDs out there. Thanks, Stéphane. Le 27/04/09 20:11, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@speakeasy.net> a écrit :
Stephanie
Exactly!
There will just be the potential for many more of this type of operational process issues to occur and thus we will need to watch and see what areas of DNS services and protocol technologies to push the IETF to change/improve since the type of ³personal networking² that helps with day-to-day operations today won¹t be as usable/workable as the number of TLD¹s and IDN-TLDs grow.
Take care Terry
From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 9:42 AM To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'GNSO Council' Subject: Re: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example...
Hi Terry,
I don¹t see any example of fundamental operational difficulties linked with TLDs in the example your describe.
All I see is a mismanaged domain name transfer from one registrar to another...
Stéphane
Le 27/04/09 18:28, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@speakeasy.net> a écrit : All
Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect an example not to share!
If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org> right now. Some of you all will get ³cannot find web server²!
I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end of the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasn¹t actually down and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine (which won¹t even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in IPv6). But it didn¹t resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from Seattle.
They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs.
TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via ³personal contacts² as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD operators globally. Our technology will need to significantly improve to insure coordination and security between what will be a growing number of TLD and IDN-TLD operators; and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical complexity.
Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney.
Take care Terry
Stéphane Apologies in spades! I knew that. There is a lot of personal networking involved at the TLD level as I understand it from discussions over the years with various operators. And from years of operations, this feels like there are steps in the transfer processes that require too many human fingers involved. I guess we will see next year as it rolls out. My predictions is still that we will need some new capabilities to allow technology to take over more of the basic operational processes in both the transfers and the new TLD operations as they scale up. One of my other worries is that DNS and BGP are both standouts as being weak links in the Internet infrastructure without even including security. And as is, the lack of adequately defined interoperability in our key security protocols; IPSec, IKE, IKEv2, DNSSec, PKI in both IPv4 and IPv6 makes both DNS and BGP hard to secure and will be challenging to deploy in a fully heterogeneous vendor infrastructure. We are pushing for the IETF to work this issue more aggressively. Take care Terry From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 2:37 AM To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'GNSO Council' Subject: Re: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example... Terry, Its Stephane, the French spelling of Stefan if you prefer ;-) As for the transfer problem you raise, I still dont understand why you are linking this to broader issues such as those described in your email. A registrar to registrar transfer is more dependent on the quality of the registrars handling it than on the number of TLDs around. There is no personal networking involved and a achieving a successful domain name transfer from one registrar to another in a specific TLD has absolutely nothing to do with the number of other TLDs out there. Thanks, Stéphane. Le 27/04/09 20:11, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@speakeasy.net> a écrit : Stephanie Exactly! There will just be the potential for many more of this type of operational process issues to occur and thus we will need to watch and see what areas of DNS services and protocol technologies to push the IETF to change/improve since the type of personal networking that helps with day-to-day operations today wont be as usable/workable as the number of TLDs and IDN-TLDs grow. Take care Terry From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 9:42 AM To: Terry L Davis, P.E.; 'GNSO Council' Subject: Re: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example... Hi Terry, I dont see any example of fundamental operational difficulties linked with TLDs in the example your describe. All I see is a mismanaged domain name transfer from one registrar to another... Stéphane Le 27/04/09 18:28, « Terry L Davis, P.E. » <tdavis2@speakeasy.net> a écrit : All Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect an example not to share! If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org> right now. Some of you all will get cannot find web server! I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end of the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasnt actually down and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine (which wont even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in IPv6). But it didnt resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from Seattle. They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs. TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via personal contacts as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD operators globally. Our technology will need to significantly improve to insure coordination and security between what will be a growing number of TLD and IDN-TLD operators; and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical complexity. Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney. Take care Terry
participants (2)
-
Stéphane Van Gelder -
Terry L Davis, P.E.