Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks

Mark Elkins <> Mon, 08 May 2023 13:16 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1163EC1519A8 for <>; Mon, 8 May 2023 06:16:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.18
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.18 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yplu3QD4Orqz for <>; Mon, 8 May 2023 06:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:42a0::71]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD324C1516F2 for <>; Mon, 8 May 2023 06:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; ; s=2305; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Sender:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=rdo5McOLVU6DHbB0ksZ3M1uhDE1RpW12Y3sQrl2DA/I=; b=U2gMDjVVLsCYezsSAr2PuBTvIC 27Ut9KwSGdo2X7kcUOT3AAhvKmTHGuJ+7z8uYPtib9Soe9I7lg/G8jc/5BAPAnm3bgRqg20/1ANam 7ZypLmzym7geovRHmVGe5sqMw1qspNB7oAnbU4qgVRfEswtUcEDFKNA3q599Ihd6ndss=;
Received: from [] (port=46064 helo=[]) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <>) id 1pw0if-000acZ-7N for; Mon, 08 May 2023 15:16:01 +0200
References: <> <> <> <> <>
From: Mark Elkins <>
Organization: Posix Systems
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 08 May 2023 15:15:30 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------D6488D9C46A0F49399E71904"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2023 13:16:20 -0000

Back in 1995 when I took over the management of CO.ZA from Mike Lawrie, 
his strong suggestion was to only add properly functioning delegations 
to the Zone File - so that is what we did. Why add delegations that are 
broken to the working parent?

As a Registrar - if I am not providing the DNS for a Domain - then I 
have checks on my side to see if the Nameservers are working before 
sending them on to the Parent registry.

I also have a "Reservation" or Free service so that people can register 
a domain (using my Nameservers) but the domain is "read-only" on my side 
(no one can change any of the zone file contents). Point being - the 
delegation works if sent to a parent.

This all works fine.

In addition - I also manage the EDU.ZA and ALT.ZA zone files. These are 
both small zones and use the Registry/Registrant model (2 x R). Apart 
from running CDS checks, I also run weekly (Monday early morning) 
Nameserver checks so will see when things break and then email the 
domain owner of the event. Consequently - the two parent zones are 
pretty clean.


Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa       Tel: +27.826010496 <tel:+27826010496>
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: 

Posix SystemsVCARD for MJ Elkins