Re: [DNSOP] Asking TLD's to perform checks.

Frederico A C Neves <fneves@registro.br> Wed, 11 November 2015 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <fneves@registro.br>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1571B3A4E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:20:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.638
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.638 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CNLRILhT5kch for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clone.registro.br (clone.registro.br [IPv6:2001:12ff:0:2::4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E118C1B3A4D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:20:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by clone.registro.br (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 13A6924C0E7; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:20:01 -0200 (BRST)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:20:01 -0200
From: Frederico A C Neves <fneves@registro.br>
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
Message-ID: <20151111212001.GK99400@registro.br>
References: <20151105235402.39FFC3BF2F29@rock.dv.isc.org> <20151110152511.6f1a1c20@pallas.home.time-travellers.org> <20151110204330.C47C63C7D699@rock.dv.isc.org> <7B4B7DEA-C705-437E-8BC1-64D96D55014E@vpnc.org> <0F2DD78A-69C4-49DA-936F-C32D0FC97CC2@rfc1035.com> <5373DDAB-1ED2-489B-AB62-BA7CF6D3DB48@frobbit.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <5373DDAB-1ED2-489B-AB62-BA7CF6D3DB48@frobbit.se>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/U-T337oNyJhDrpuJA85OB1xxX9A>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Asking TLD's to perform checks.
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 21:20:04 -0000

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:25:39AM +0100, Patrik Fältström wrote:
...
> 
> That said, initiatives like the one I did run did push errors (for some definition of errors) from 22% to maybe 17% in .SE and my inspection of the rest say that getting errors down to 15% is possible, but more is very hard.
> 

Enforcing at delegation and change time and checking and reporing on a
regular basis, weekly and montly respectively, brought us to 5%.

http://registro.br/estatisticas.html

Look at the botton "Status das Delegações" and follow the total error
links to trending graphics.

> And, having a BCP or such that give suggestions on what can be viewed as "correct" would not be bad, but how to use it must be up to the reader.
> 

Agree,

Fred