<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example...
- To: "'GNSO Council'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] TLD Operational concerns -- A Perfect example...
- From: "Terry L Davis, P.E." <tdavis2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:28:47 -0700
- Expiry-date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0700
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcnHVTxhKj/+3fo6TTadTEhbHo5RPA==
All
Earlier this year some of you all wondered what my operational concerns were
with simultaneous starting of the new TLD and IDNs. This is just too perfect
an example not to share!
If you try, to bring up www.isoc.org right now. Some of you all will get
"cannot find web server"!
I was on a call with ISOC this morning on some other issues. At the end of
the call, I asked them why their website was down. It wasn't actually down
and using the IP address instead of the URL, it worked fine (which won't
even be doable by anyone other than a network engineer in IPv6). But it
didn't resolve on at least AT&T and Comcast from Seattle.
They just emailed back with the cause. They switched registrars today and
had only a partial transfer occur to the TLDs.
TLD operations up to now have as much been networked via "personal contacts"
as by technology since there were only a dozen or so TLD operators globally.
Our technology will need to significantly improve to insure coordination and
security between what will be a growing number of TLD and IDN-TLD operators;
and IDN alone adds tremendously to the DNS technical complexity.
Anyway good food for discussions over a late night drink in Sydney.
Take care
Terry
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|