<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Joe Abley <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jabley@hopcount.ca" target="_blank">jabley@hopcount.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><br>
On 2014-01-10, at 11:30, David Conrad <<a href="mailto:drc@virtualized.org">drc@virtualized.org</a>> wrote:<br></div></blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">
>> e.g. for registry operators who have already passed pre-delegation testing and are perhaps already running some new gTLD registries in production.<br>
><br>
> I'm not positive (or authoritative in any way) but I don't believe folks who are already running in production will be forced to do anything they don't want to. As I said, I believe for them, the idea is to allow them to move more quickly to normal operation.<br>
<br>
</div>So what happens to a registry that is currently publishing new gTLD zones for delegated strings, but is also expected to accommodate approved but as-yet-undelegated strings?<br>
<div class="im"><br>
>>> Could you be explicit in the headaches you see?<br>
>> It seems like a lot of work for lawyers and developers,<br>
><br>
> Not being a lawyer, I'll not comment on that bit. What development do you see being necessary?<br>
<br>
</div>It's the changes to the registry state machine that worry me.<br>
<br>
We seem to be talking about changing the registry state machine such that there's an extra stage involved whereby DNS records other than those required for a simple delegation will be published for some period of time before they are replaced by the expected delegation. I suspect that in at least some cases this is going to require code changes, helpdesk/NOC changes, monitoring and measurement changes, documentation changes, re-education for sales staff, etc. None of this is impossible, but it seems to me it has a distinctly non-zero cost.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Joe,<br><br></div><div>What changes to the "registry state machine" do you imagine? The way I'm seeing this I don't see any changes to the registry state machine.<br><br>
</div><div>If this is implemented as a "trial delegation", as I understand the proposal by Jeff, then I imagine something like the following. After an nTLD has passed PDT but before the nTLD goes to production, that is the opportunity to deploy this "trial delegation". It requires only setting up specific zones for the TLD in the DNS.<br>
<br></div><div>We need procedures/rules for when this starts, when it ends, evaluating what happens, what actions to take under circumstances we can predict (as well as those we can't predict), etc. I presume that JAS will expand on all this, including considering whatever advice comes from this discussion.<br>
<br></div><div>However, none of this involves the registry.<br><br></div><div>Did you have something else in mind?<br><br>Jim<br><br></div></div></div></div>