Re: [dssa] hm. does anybody have an authoritative source for the definition of "core registry functions"?
> Von: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> > An: dssa@xxxxxxxxx > Datum: 11.01.2012 14:52 > Betreff: Re: [dssa] hm. does anybody have an authoritative source for the definition of "core registry functions"? > Gesendet von: owner-dssa@xxxxxxxxx > > > so in a recent blog post, the Cloud Registry folks quoted that same section of the Guidebook and then summarized the list thusly; > > EPP, DNS, Whois, IDN and DNSSEC > > how do people feel about that list of services? > > if i were a stratifying kinda guy, i might say that DNS is one kind of thing ("the DNS") and EPP, WHOIS, IDN and DNSSEC are > another kind of thing (services that support "the DNS" but not actually part of it). so from our charter, are those other things > "in scope" for our review? > > i'm posing this partly from the project-manager point of view (trying to manage scope) and partly from a technical/architecture/ > boundaries point of view. it seems to me that "the DNS" could run without any of those other services. and attacks against those > other things, while causing a lot of pain, wouldn't take down "the DNS" Strongly in favour of the latter > > discuss. ;-) > > mikey > > btw, here's a link to their post -- http://www.cloudregistry.net/blog/e/gtld-registry-services/ > > > On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:04 AM, Greg Aaron wrote: > > > > > Please see the legal definition in the nTLD contract (Specification 6, > > #2), which was taken from and is the same definition as for existing gTLDs > > (see "core registry services" on the RSEP page at: > > http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/rsep.html ). That's the > > definition relevant to both existing and new gTLDs. > > > > That definition says that critical registry services are those: "critical > > to the following tasks: the receipt of data from registrars concerning > > registrations of domain names and name servers; provision to registrars of > > status information relating to the zone servers for the TLD; dissemination > > of TLD zone files; operation of the registry zone servers; and > > dissemination of contact and other information concerning domain name > > server registrations in the TLD as required by the Registry Agreement". > > > > New gTLDs will be contractually required to have DNSSEC, but existing > > gTLDs are not required to have DNSSEC. Many ccTLDs have not signed their > > zones, and many ccTLDs and gTLDs who have signed their zones still don't > > allow registrants to sign individual domains. It is highly desirable for > > registries to provide DNSSEC, and when they do it's important to do it > > correctly. But because of the above reasons it may not be possible to say > > that DNSSEC is a "critical" registry function. > > > > Escrow's an important thing, but it doesn't seem to fall under the above > > definition. (The clause "dissemination of contact and other information > > concerning domain name server registrations" is about WHOIS, I believe.) > > Note that some, maybe many, ccTLDs don't escrow. Hopefully all make > > off-site backups and observe other prudent practices, but perhaps few do > > it like ICANN requires, which mandates the use of third-party independent > > escrow providers. > > > > All best, > > --Greg > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Drazek, Keith [mailto:kdrazek@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 12:53 PM > > To: dssa@xxxxxxxxx > > Subject: RE: [dssa] hm. does anybody have an authoritative source for the > > definition of "core registry functions"? > > > > > > > > Hi Mikey, > > > > The phrase now used by ICANN is "critical registry functions," which has > > been defined most recently through the new gTLD application process. The > > definition is in several places in the Applicant Guidebook, including in > > the section covering the Continued Operations Instrument. > > > > http://www.icann.org/en/registries/continuity/gtld-registry-continuity-pla > > n-25apr09-en.pdf > > > > > > Earlier definitions had a slightly longer lists of six or more: > > > > http://www.icann.org/en/registries/reports/registry-failover-01jun07.htm#a > > nchor3 (see Section 3 of the 2007 Registry Failover Report) > > > > http://www.icann.org/en/registries/continuity/gtld-registry-continuity-pla > > n-25apr09-en.pdf (see page 4 of the 2009 Registry Continuity Plan) > > > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > Regards, Keith > > > > > > > > > > Keith Drazek > > Director of Policy > > kdrazek@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > m: +1-571-377-9182 > > 21345 Ridgetop Circle Dulles, VA 20166 > > > > VerisignInc.com > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-dssa@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-dssa@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike > > O'Connor > > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 9:20 AM > > To: dssa@xxxxxxxxx > > Subject: [dssa] hm. does anybody have an authoritative source for the > > definition of "core registry functions"? > > > > > > hi all, > > > > i came across the "core registry functions" phrase and thought that might > > be a good list for us to have. here's the quote that got me started > > > > "Core registry functions are: access to the shared registry > > system; Whois, DNS resolution; data escrow; and DNSSEC" > > > > the list looks like a good scope-defining punch-list for some of our work. > > > > but this is from a Minds and Machines advocacy piece on CircleID and is by > > no means authoritative. are they quoting an RFC or something that *is* > > authoritative? if so, could you point me in the right direction? > > > > thanks, > > > > mikey > > > > - - - - - - - - - > > phone 651-647-6109 > > fax 866-280-2356 > > web http://www.haven2.com > > handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, > > etc.) > > - - - - - - - - - > phone 651-647-6109 > fax 866-280-2356 > web http://www.haven2.com > handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.) > >