Re: [council] Proposed resolution in response to Stuart Lynn's request

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

Bruce,

Thank you very much.
In addition to your proposed text, I would like we also explicitely 
make the Names Council and ICANN Board aware that the work on the 
DNS data quality is a new activity, which comes in addition to the 
core IANA function, and that there is and will be an impacted cost 
on Registries and Registrars and Registrants altogether, 
gTLD and ccTLD space.

One shall note that many of ccTLD registries, and I am sure the
gTLD Registrars as well, provide publicly available tools for quality 
checking at the time of registration. But situation is much more difficult
afterwards: just to give you a perception, in M&M survey quoted
by Stuart Lynn, dot fr has the best quality zone file in November 2001
... which means still "1) France (31.1%)" of performance errors ... 
while in August 2002 "71.1 % of .COM Zones [are] Misconfigured"

The quality of the DNS data is at every level, it is in everybody
interest, it has cost, and it is our responsibility - I would say 
it is very similar to another universal resource such as ozone.


My friedly amendment would be to add the following whereas:

Whereas the responsibility of the DNS data quality is
a new activity, which comes in addition to the core IANA function,
and that there is and will be an impacted cost on Registries
and Registrars and Registrants altogether, gTLD and ccTLD space.

Kind regards,
Elisabeth
NB. A small semantic observation: IANA is a function.


=======================================================================
Hello Elisabeth,

Following the discussion during the names council teleconference on 26 Sept
2002 on your proposed resolution, I recommend you consider the following
resolution that is derived 
from your whereas clause 10, and resolution (c).  The resolution focuses
only on the technical issues, and does not seek at this stage to define the
policies for who is responsible for carrying out certain checks.  The policy
discussion should follow after the technical work is done.  I note the
general DNS principle that at any point in the hierarchy there is a joint
relationship between the parent and child, and the parent has a
responsibility to ensure that information held about the child at the
parent's level is correct.

Here is the proposed resolution:


Whereas the stability of the DNS depends on the quality of the nameserver
information contained in the zones at all levels of the DNS hierarchy.

Whereas Stuart Lynn and Vint Cerf have written to the Names Council 
on 21 September seeking the opinion of the Names Council on the 
suggestion to ask the Committee on Security and Stability
(http://www.icann.org/committees/security/) to develop a recommendation on
the most sound technical practices to follow to improve the DNS data quality
at all levels in the system,
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/cerf-lynn-letter-to-names-council-20sep0
2.htm

The Names Council resolves that:
The ICANN Board should ask the Committee on Security and Stability to work
cooperatively with IANA, the TLD managers, and registrars, to develop a
recommendation on the most sound technical practices to follow to improve
the DNS data quality at all levels of the DNS hierarchy.


Regards,
Bruce Tonkin