[dns-operations] xn--l1acc TLD gone bad already

[Edward Lewis]

On Jan 3, 2014, at 9:46, Chris Thompson wrote:
> One has to feel that the administrators of this TLD should never have
> attempted to make it signed, if this is the best they can do.


This is not a response about the TLD in the subject line.

I spoke with one of the operators with zones that aren't quite right at a conference maybe a year or two back about their zone, offering to help (in a limited way) if they needed, to get the zone completely set up.

The response from the person in charge of the shop said to me, in summary, that these were only their IDN zones and as such they treated them as experimental.  As far as can be determined, only folks (like me) who run periodic observations notice that there are issues.  If that's the case, in the operator's eyes, it is a case of "no harm, no foul."

In as much as it irks me to see prolonged operational thorns on my reports, I've learned to accept that not all TLDs have the same goals in mind and if the responsible party doesn't care, it's not an outsider's business to make them care.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis             
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

Why is it that people who fear government monitoring of social media are
surprised to learn that I avoid contributing to social media?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20140103/6fd0ac1f/attachment.html>