Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] next steps for draft-opportunistic-adotq

[Ilari Liusvaara <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 02:50:00PM +0000, Jim Reid wrote:
> 
> 
> > On 23 Mar 2021, at 14:16, Brian Haberman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > Is there an issue with putting SVCB info in the TLD zones?
> 
> Yes - for gTLDs. Almost all of them have contracts with ICANN. Adding
> SVCB records to ccTLDs is easier (in principle) since few (any?) of
> them have contracts with ICANN. Since those gTLD contracts say “no
> SVCB records”, registries can’t/shouldn’t add them to their zones.

I took a look how many gTLDs have in-zone nameservers:


Found total of 1503 TLDs:
- 779 TLDs have in-bailiwick nameserver(s).
- The remaining 724 have all their nameservers in another TLD.

Of the 779 TLDs that have in-bailiwick nameserver(s):
- 58 TLDs have in-zone nameserver(s).
- The remaining 721 have all their nameservers in other zone(s).

Of the 58 TLDs that have in-zone nameserver(s):
- 3 are gTLDs.
- The remaining 55 are ccTLDs.

The 3 gTLDs with in-zone nameservers are:
- brussels.
- tel.
- vlaanderen.


So looks like 1500 out of 1503 TLDs could add new rrtypes to their
nsname nodes. And the remaining 3 could do so after spliting out the
subzone with their nameservers into full zone.


Notes:

- Some TLDs have both in-bailiwick and out-bailiwick nameservers. E.g.,
  ad.
- All 2-character names are assumed to be ccTLD, everything else is
  assumed to be gTLD.
- None of the gTLDs with in-zone nameservers have any out-zone
  nameservers.
- Some ccTLDs have both in-zone and out-zone nameservers. E.g., at.
- None of the gTLDs with in-zone nameservers have any nameservers
  directly under apex.
- There are some ccTLDs that have put their nameservers directly under
  their apex. E.g., fi.




-Ilari