[cooperation-wg] Clueful DNS from a public policy perspective

In message <64D1E31C-E56C-4ECE-8198-EE607AC216E9 at rfc1035.com>, at 
12:51:14 on Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> writes

>For the general public, I'd expect most governments and regulators would
>look to market forces to solve the issues around DNS robustness, just
>like they tend to rely on market forces to deal with the good and bad
>ISPs/hosting companies/registrars/etc. Some punters will pay a premium
>to get a better, more robust service. Others won't.

I agree that many governments and regulators don't currently address the 
issue of deficient service from telecoms providers. The first step is 
for there to be an acknowledgement that such a thing as deficient 
service exists (for example is a provision of one non-redundant NS in 
any sense "fit for purpose", let alone "complying with industry best 
practice").

If we can agree (here on this list) that there are many telecoms 
providers who either lack clue because they've cut costs by employing 
clueless staff, or have taken a commercial decision to deliver a 
clueless service, then that's one small step on our long journey.

I imagine that such deficiencies are as frustrating to conscientious 
service providers as they are to the public, as it tends to create a 
"race to the bottom".
-- 
Roland Perry