[dns-operations] the real reason for ICANN's gTLD expansion seems to be...

[Francisco Obispo]

Hi Paul, (happy new year :-) )

comments inline..


On 31 Dec 2017, at 23:37, Paul Vixie wrote:

>> …
>
> spamhaus also has a passive dns database, so, they do know about 
> domains which have not been reported as abusive.
>


They also have our live dns feed (via axfr/ixfr), and full access to our 
whois database, but a lot of the domain names in


>> ...
>>
>> I also don’t believe abuse is related to who the backend operator 
>> is and
>> whether their employees attend dns-oarc or not. The *main* factor
>> associated with abuse has to do with registrars not screening their
>> customers properly. Those registrars who spend the extra dime on
>> checking the customer’s reputation tend to have a far less abuse 
>> numbers
>> than those who do not.
>
> while i agree, i think you'll find extreme correlation between backend 
> operators who attend dns-oarc, and backend operators who screen their 
> customers properly. so, this may be misleading, but it might also not 
> be wrong.
>


Yes, I’m sure there’s a correlation. The registrar has definitively 
more data in hand than the registry to make a decision on whether a 
registration can lead to abuse or not. We (registry) only have the 
reputation feeds to look at, and a master switch to turn off the name.

>> There is a third factor, that whether we like it or not, /exists/, 
>> and
>> it is related to the marketing campaigns that exists have towards new
>> TLDs, so every report that comes out there needs to be read very
>> carefully to separate the facts from speculation.
>
> i don't understand why you said this. marketing campaigns of this kind 
> either will, or won't, lead to greater abuse of the strings marketed; 
> they either will, or won't, put competitive pressure on other backend 
> operators to market-in-kind which either will, or won't, cause abuse 
> in those other strings. no matter how the marketing occurs or succeeds 
> or fails, the abuse stats will show the impact. those of us receiving 
> communications that leverage in some way an abused gtld string will 
> not care what the prime cause was, only the proximate cause, which is 
> lassitude in screening new registrants or in handling abuse 
> complaints.
>

My sentiment is that we need solid, unbiased measures for abuse in the 
DNS, that combined with a well defined role at various levels 
(RY/RAR/Reputation Source, etc.) in a coordinated way, we might just 
have a chance at keeping low abuse levels, perhaps a forum like dns-oarc 
can help.

Best regards,

Hope to see you soon.

francisco