|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: v6 gluelessness
On Jan 18, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Edward Lewis wrote: Sticking up for IANA... Thanks! It makes sense to me. If I ask someone to slave my zone, I'm placing (perhaps implicit) trust that they will operate the server in a responsible way. I don't have the prerogative to tell the other person how to run their server but I have the prerogative to withdraw the slave request if I an unhappy with the way they operate the server. It makes sense to me that if you are operating a slave for someone, they get to be notified of the changes you make before they go into effect. Right. The challenge is that current policy requires explicit approval from both the Administrative and Technical contacts for the zone (to ensure they have really been notified). As shocking as it might be to some, there are ACs and TCs that don't respond to (repeated) e-mail (or faxes or telephone calls) from IANA. This can (and has) caused requests for name server changes to block. This is a known problem and was the subject of a public comment request quite some time ago (see http://forum.icann.org/lists/root-glue-comments/ for the responses). Unfortunately, things sort of got stuck. Hopefully, Randy's request will unstick things. Regards, -drc
|