[dns-operations] The strange case of fox.com
rgoodson at gronkulator.com
Thu Mar 3 02:09:41 UTC 2016
In the instance that I brought up, undergoing excommunication of the
zone successfully might have made the DNS better as a whole (making the
world a better place), but it would not have solved my problem.
My problem was that users couldn't get to a web site some of the time to
pay their credit card bill or check their balance (more accurately, my
problem was having to listen to the complaining that ensued). If I,
instead of implementing a workaround, got domain excommunicated, then
instead of my users not being able to get to a web site some of the
time, now they can't get to it ever.
The only benefit to me would have been no longer hearing "it works on
On 3/2/16 4:28 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <3c1ba59ee6484aec9ac3fa8bb3e97d81 at PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG
>> , Leo Vegoda writes:
>> Mark Andrews wrote:
>>> Which is why you should have continued with the proceedures in RFC
>>> 1033 and requested excommunication.
>> In the context of the DNS, what does excommunication mean?
> The delegation and any glue records below it are removed from the
> published zone. I would think it would only be until such time as
> the underlying problem is addressed.
> This is documented in RFC 1033 as the step of last resort:
> These are the suggested steps you should take if you are having
> problems that you believe are caused by someone else's name server:
> 1. Complain privately to the responsible person for the domain. You
> can find their mailing address in the SOA record for the domain.
> 2. Complain publicly to the responsible person for the domain.
> 3. Ask the NIC for the administrative person responsible for the
> domain. Complain. You can also find domain contacts on the NIC in
> the file NETINFO:DOMAIN-CONTACTS.TXT
> 4. Complain to the parent domain authorities.
> 5. Ask the parent authorities to excommunicate the domain.
>> How would it make the world a better place?
> It makes people fix problems but raising them to a level that they
> cannot ignore if they intend to still have the name be visible in
> the DNS.
> The parent also becomes a neutral third party who presumably would
> not act on the request without evidence of a problem.
More information about the dns-operations