IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks

Mark Elkins <mark@posix.co.za> Mon, 08 May 2023 13:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mje@posix.co.za>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1163EC1519A8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 May 2023 06:16:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.18
X-Spam-Level:
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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=posix.co.za
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yplu3QD4Orqz for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 May 2023 06:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.vweb.co.za (relay.vweb.co.za [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 ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD324C1516F2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 May 2023 06:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=posix.co.za ; 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 [165.255.87.92] (port=46064 helo=[160.124.48.9]) by relay.vweb.co.za with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <mark@posix.co.za>) id 1pw0if-000acZ-7N for dnsop@ietf.org; Mon, 08 May 2023 15:16:01 +0200
Reply-To: mje@posix.co.za
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20230504.200747.619569100111463947.he@uninett.no> <8ee0d0dd-685b-f767-e5bd-d722cc873dc8@desec.io> <infYuCGtin93oe5p2i5xJp8pcRb7w42d543MM2sVkYVjvFHtzAXROt49cDyiguu_SZz7xg4xk802loka9IA_0U--Uu3cJIQOigisNvOOw7A=@strandkip.nl> <20230507.011052.1632879695052938676.he@uninett.no> <85560f7e-9507-f821-c425-9f277c28bd68@desec.io>
From: Mark Elkins <mark@posix.co.za>
Organization: Posix Systems
Message-ID: <7bd3c79e-1d34-88bc-7fbd-fdd423a8d7d2@posix.co.za>
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: <85560f7e-9507-f821-c425-9f277c28bd68@desec.io>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------D6488D9C46A0F49399E71904"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/cmw9lqh548wkdcP96xWvyKBf920>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Delegation acceptance checks
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: 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
mje@posix.co.za       Tel: +27.826010496 <tel:+27826010496>
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za 
<https://ftth.posix.co.za>

Posix SystemsVCARD for MJ Elkins

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email