[dns-operations] [Ext] Re: Browser Public suffixes list

[Meir Kraushar]

Hi kim
Launching this IDN TLD was actually the first time we created a new TLD
(well, besides the cctld we already maintain from long ago). For a small
registry like ours, it is something  you will probably never practice. So
frankly, no one here knew that the PSL ever existed, until we were cought
in a bind. Even then, it took us a lot of googling and time to come across
some relevant information, and finally to realize the existance of PSL, to
our embarrassment. When that happened it was already too late, we had to
postpone the new TLD launch.
As the DNS guy we did everything. All required procedures with ICANN and
IANA. But then we found out that there is this "little thing" with browsers.
I think it's important to prevent such a mishap from happening again.
My experience with IANA is such that when something matters and is
important, you know how to make it very clear to us registries.  I was not
suggesting automation or synchronization with Mozilla, that of course is
complicated.
But for example  a remark in the rzm site, a reference to the documentation
would have emphasized the PSL stage, would have put
 that info in front of us.
Meir

On Mon, Aug 29, 2022, 03:05 Kim Davies <kim.davies at iana.org> wrote:

> Hi Jothan,
>
> Quoting Jothan Frakes on Saturday August 27, 2022:
> > I am really frustrated that the materials developed for IANA to share to
> > avoid things like this were not distributed, as awareness would have led
> to
> > earlier request, which in turn would have diminished the propagation
> timing
> > gap with the browser side.
>
> I'll confess to being quite perplexed because it sounds like IANA has
> dropped the ball, but I am at a loss as to what IANA materials you
> are referring to. I am not aware of any materials developed for IANA
> to distribute, and we don't have an existing practice of relaying
> information about third party projects to TLD managers. Apologies if
> I've completely overlooked something.
>
> I know you and I have had discussions in years past about other TLDs
> that were missing from the PSL, and I've asked if there were ways IANA
> could contribute. The impression I came away with was the PSL guarded
> its independence and therefore there wasn't a role for IANA. In light of
> that I'd shared with you some sample code that I felt could immediately
> be used by the PSL maintainers to identify gaps, or built upon to
> trigger additions in your workflow:
>
>     https://gist.github.com/kjd/3b1141451c77e50e0ab1120caac40072
>
> If PSL is still not automatically recognizing new TLDs, I would suggest
> it would still be a better approach to automate rather than putting
> the burden on each and every TLD manager to manually request to be
> added. After all, the underlying truth of a TLD's existence is easily
> ascertainable with existing tools without adding extraneous workflow
> steps.
>
> kim
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20220829/41b6becc/attachment.html>