This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ncc-services-wg] Re: Allow DNSMON services to monitor ENUM domains
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Re: Allow DNSMON services to monitor ENUM domains
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Re: Allow DNSMON services to monitor ENUM domains
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ondřej Surý
ondrej.sury at nic.cz
Mon Oct 8 11:29:49 CEST 2007
Jim Reid píše v Čt 04. 10. 2007 v 14:34 +0100: > Ondrej, I raised a number of issues about this proposal when you > first presented this to the ENUM WG. To the best of my knowledge > these have still not been resolved. > > Wearing no hats, my concerns are as follows: > > 1 DNS Monitoring is not a core NCC service. It should not be doing > this IMO. It's OK for the NCC to monitor its own name servers, but > that's all. > > 2 By offering a commercial DNS Monitoring service, the NCC is > distorting the market. Its presence presents other organisations from > offering similar services because the barrier to entry has been > artificially increased. And on top of that the NCC has cherry-picked > the best customers. > > 3 The costs of the NCC's DNS monitoring service are not clear. Which > raises the prospect of complaints about monopoly membership fees > cross-subsidising non-core commercial activities. This is a > particular worry of mine given that the NCC's initial investment in > name server monitoring was met from its membership fees. I understand your concerns in Issue 1-3, but it seems to me, that you are arguing with DNSMON service itself and not with my proposal which is meant to broaden scope of DNSMON service. > 4 If any monitoring of ENUM delegations was to be done by the NCC, it > must only be at the request of the Administration concerned. This > avoids issues about national sovereignty. I accept this is unlikely > to be a concern for many countries. But that will not be the case in > the parts of the world that are hostile to Internet governance in its > broadest sense being outside an international treaty organisation. It > would not be wise IMO to open another window for those sorts of > complaints and attacks. Can you please clarify what do you mean by "at the request of the Administration concerned"? Who is Administration? Tier-1 operator? > Issues 1-3 have parallels with the historical situation of the NCC > providing DNS service for ccTLDs. That situation is beginning to get > untangled. And for the same reasons outlined above: non-core service, > competition concerns, cross-subsidy, etc. It seems unwise to be > opening up the same can of worms all over again just as an earlier > one is starting to get cleared up. Ondrej. -- Ondřej Surý technický ředitel/Chief Technical Officer ----------------------------------------- CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o. -- .cz domain registry Americká 23,120 00 Praha 2,Czech Republic mailto:ondrej.sury at nic.cz http://nic.cz/ sip:ondrej.sury at nic.cz tel:+420.222745110 mob:+420.739013699 fax:+420.222745112 -----------------------------------------
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Re: Allow DNSMON services to monitor ENUM domains
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Re: Allow DNSMON services to monitor ENUM domains
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]