Re: [ga] Re: ICANN & Stability

[Marc Schneiders <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>]

On Sat, 21 Sep 2002, at 20:26 [=GMT-0700], M. Stuart Lynn wrote:

> DNS data accuracy continues to be an important, and by some measures
> increasingly urgent, goal.  Recent "Domain Health" surveys conducted
> by Men & Mice <http://menandmice.com/6000/6350_eu_survey.html> and
> <http://menandmice.com/6000/61_recent_survey.html> have reported
> surprisingly high performance error rates in reviews of subdomains
> within various TLDs.

The website you mention, offers a FREE download of a trial version of "DNS
Expert", which checks DNS zones for errors. I love everything free, so I
got myself the tool. Since I could not quickly think of any other domain
to check, I tried icann.org. The result:

8 (eight) errors.

And 1 (one) warning.

[Honesty compels me to add, that not all 8 errors constitute necessarily
faulty configurations in the zone file. Some are of the 'host is
unreachable' type. I guess these could be on the same segment of the ICANN
network on which the machine that does the public forum website (reported
down for a while) also lives.]

> errors through configuration mismatches between the DNS data in the root
> zone (which remains unchanged) and the affected TLD zones

This is exactly one of the errors in the ICANN.ORG zone... Pot, kettle,
black, blacker.

> It appears to us that the issues about what practices should be
> followed by the IANA, TLD managers, and other participants in the
> ICANN process to promote improved DNS data quality is one that is ripe
> for examination.

ICANN could start with repairing its own zone? And then consider whether
it has any right to claim oversight over those of others, even if it does
the thing right itself?


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html