[dns-operations] TLD zones with lame servers

Paul Vixie paul at redbarn.org
Tue Jun 11 04:17:00 UTC 2019

On Tuesday, 11 June 2019 03:50:18 UTC Mark Andrews wrote:
> > On 11 Jun 2019, at 12:49 pm, Doug Barton <dougb at dougbarton.email> wrote:
> > 
> > ... there is no mechanism currently for ICANN to remove a name server
> > from a delegation without permission from the ccTLD Manager. Absent a
> > specific policy or mechanism that comes from the ICANN process, they
> > would be wrong to do so.
> Which is a gross omission.  Operators of servers need to have to the ability
> to remove themselves from a delegation.

i once owned a domain (2LD.1LD) name one of whose subdomains (3LD.2LD.1LD) was 
used as a delegated name server by several TLD's. i asked, for several years, 
to have the name changed to 3LD.2LD'.1LD', since there was another name that 
had the same IP address and performed the same service. no dice -- there was 
no process for it.

so i sold the domain, and informed my friends within ICANN of the date-certain 
when the parent domain would go outside my control. then, they found a way.

my friends within ICANN are heroes. i believe that they, and because of them 
the organization, does _all it can_ to get to good outcomes. but, we're merely 
human, and so, shackled by tradition, superstition, and necessary respect for 
the rules of both law and contracts. thus, all the "muddling through" we do.

> > I have as much sympathy for the technical correctness argument as anyone
> > else, but what we would consider to be a clear bright line is a slippery
> > slope to others, with a pool of hangry alligators at the bottom.

i suggest that a demand from the administrator of 2LD.1LD to remove a name 
like 3LD.2LD.1LD from some TLD delegation, must be honoured by ICANN, with 
notice but no other regard for the wishes of the TLD operator, and that this 
rule change should be considered noncontroversial by all parties. if the TLD 
operator makes no similar edit to their apex NS RRset, that's another problem, 
subject to other solutions, and unrelated to this process question.

note, marka's original topic was different, so, this is a threadjacking.


More information about the dns-operations mailing list