[dns-operations] Hearing first complains about failing internal resolving due to .prod TLD

[Doug Barton]

On 9/11/14 10:58 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 08:42:45PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> 3. You respond with the same URL, plus pontification on various topics,
>
> If by "pontification on various topics" you mean "the bit about how
> the new gTLD database actually can tell you what stuff has passed all
> the hurdles, even if it's not in a form trivially useful to geeks",
> then I suppose you're right.
 >
>> including a list of already delegated TLDs that you point out is not updated
>> in real time
>
> I didn't point that out, the page itself did.

 From your message to Joshua:

"There's also 
http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings, but it 
explicitly says that it's not being updated in real time."

But maybe that's what you meant ... it's really quite hard for me to 
tell what the heck you're talking about at this point. :)

> I am prepared to grant
> it mystifying to me that ICANN, which holds the IANA contract, is
> unable to mirror content from IANA pages into ICANN pages, but I am
> not prepared to comment further.

On this we are in agreement.

Kim, if you're following this, your message today about the process 
that's followed by Verisign in updating ICANN about changes matches my 
recollection of the process, which is either comforting, or disturbing, 
I'm not sure which. :)  It would be appreciated if you could communicate 
internally that the IANA department within ICANN has a process to keep 
the protocol parameters list up to date in (near) real time, and that 
there is a community expectation (quite reasonable IMO) that the 
equivalent ICANN pages also be updated in a timely manner.

>> about the need for ICANN to publish "'Here's what we plan
>> to delegate next,' without perhaps giving a time." Which, FWIW, is the exact
>> content of the URL that I (and you) responded to Joshua with in the first
>> place.
>
> If that were actually the exact content of that URL, then I'd have
> posted the URL in the first place and said nothing more.

So here is where the conversations goes off the rails. This page:

https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus

shows the list of applications, which ones have been approved, and the 
order in which they will be delegated. It doesn't have dates, but as far 
as I can see it completely meets your requirements for, "'Here's what we 
plan to delegate next,' without perhaps giving a time." I'm also not 
sure how "a form trivially useful to geeks" fits into the equation here, 
as this kind of list (per Joshua's original request) is really more of 
an FYI sort of thing, and not intended to be machine parsable. It's not 
clear to me why you'd want a machine parsable list of "here's what's 
going to be delegated next," but if you can come up with a use case, Kim 
may be able to hook you up. :)

Maybe the source of your confusion is that the URL above and the 
delegated-strings page that you keep going on about are actually quite 
different things? Have you visited the applicationstatus page? If not, I 
think you'll be quite pleasantly surprised. :)

> It is
> nowhere clear that that's what it is on any site that I've yet found,
> and certainly the page itself does not indicate that.  I'd be pleased
> to learn that
> http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings includes
> dates in the future (or even "pending" in the date column), but I've
> no evidence to support that.  If you have it, then I'd be super
> interested in seeing it.
>
>> Now, did I get all that right?
>
> Apparently not.
>
>> Because I really want to benefit from your wisdom here. :)
>
> Many will tell you, in case you have not already figured this out
> yourself, that the wisdom I proffer is pretty thin gruel.

And yet the thing that's great about you, Andrew, is that you never let 
that stop you from offering it anyway.

In all seriousness, I keep belaboring this point because I think it's 
useful for the community to know that the very thing that Joshua asked 
for is actually being provided by ICANN, and that it's a worthwhile 
exercise to review that list to see if any of your "internal-only" TLDs 
are on it.

It's also worthwhile to give this a read:

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-mitigation-01aug14-en.pdf

since it describes the 127.0.53.53 stuff, as well as provides the 
interesting news that ICANN will "indefinitely defer delegating three 
TLDs: .corp, .home, and .mail." The doc goes on to explain that 
"indefinitely" does not mean "forever."

hth,

Doug