ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [registrars] nameservers and deleting a domain (was RE: Marin a del Rey Registrar Meeting - September 12)

  • To: "'Bhavin Turakhia'" <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Registrars'" <Registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [registrars] nameservers and deleting a domain (was RE: Marin a del Rey Registrar Meeting - September 12)
  • From: Paul Stahura <stahura@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 13:43:28 -0700
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

How about a .dns TLD?

Names registered there would/could be restricted to only be used as name
servers on names in other TLDs.
SLDs used as part of name server names in the other TLDs could be phased out
over time
(or at least allowed to be deleted).

Just a thought,

-----Original Message-----
From: Bhavin Turakhia [mailto:bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 12:50 PM
To: 'Registrars'
Subject: RE: [registrars] nameservers and deleting a domain (was RE: Marina
del Rey Registrar Meeting - September 12)


Mike, the method you have presented is far more interesting. I should
probably switch to it if that works. This means I can simply use a com
domain for all registries and a .us/.biz/.info domain for .com registry.

However the problem is genuine. The way child nameservers are handled is
indeed patchwork. More importantly nameserver changes are frustrating.
If a .com namserver needs to change, the corresponding change in the
other registries is almost never done. Domain names in other registries
which use the older nameservers have to be manually modified one by one
in most cases

We definetly need to have registries proactively modify this approach
and work on the ability to delete a name without having to PATCH-CREATE
child nameservers in a substitute domain name

With respect to the 2nd issue you pointed out however, the situation is
far more tricky. If I have a child nameserver NS.MYCHILDNSDOMAIN.COM and
I use it for registering com/net/org/biz/info names, and then at a later
date I change the nameserver to "NS.SOMEOTHERDOMAIN.COM", the change
needs to be made across all registries. But as a registrar we cannot
preempt this requirement, because of the uncertaintly as to which
registries actually use this record. More importantly I am wondering if
Registries themselves can interchange this information, primarily
because I may have chosen to change the child nameserver only for .com
domains, I may wish to continue using the older nameserver for .biz

Therefore even your inter-registry protocol cannot effectively
communicate a decision to change a child nameserver record across
registries. The modification would have to be handled separately at each
registry that the child nameserver record has been registered

Best Regards
Bhavin Turakhia
Founder, CEO and Chairman
Direct Line: +91 (22) 5679 7600
Direct Fax: +91 (22) 5679 7510
Board Line (USA): +1 (415) 240 4172
Board Line (India): +91 (22) 5679 7500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Lampson
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 10:58 PM
> To: 'Registrars'
> Cc: Tim Ruiz
> Subject: [registrars] nameservers and deleting a domain (was 
> RE: Marina del Rey Registrar Meeting - September 12)
> Tim,
> It appears that this work-around works at PIR and I suspect 
> other EPP Registries also.  We have been renaming nameservers 
> for domains that we delete to  "external" hosts that we can 
> define without IP addresses.  (e.g. NS1.EXAMPLE.COM (at 
> VeriSign) would be renamed LAMExxx.IAREGISTRY.US.)  The IP 
> address then becomes free so that the administrator of the 
> DNS server using that IP can reassign it to a new host name 
> if they wish.  The domains still using the old nameserver may 
> stop working at that point but this is the only wake-up call 
> we seem to be able to make to domain holders (at other
> Registrars) whose domains are hosted via the deactivated domain.
> It is possible that the issue is (temporarily?) a non-issue 
> under the Redemption Grace Period implementation at VeriSign. 
>  There have been a couple of domains which were scheduled to 
> be truly deleted at the end of the RGP cycle but were delayed 
> due to having a registered nameserver.  Since the RRP 
> "delete" command is not truly deleting the name but changing 
> the status to REDEMPTIONPERIOD, it appears that a Registrar 
> does not need to remove the nameserver.  I have not tested 
> this with any domains that we have deleted however.
> At one point during the EPP-ProvReg working group activity, I 
> had mentioned in an e-mail to Scott Hollenbeck the need for 
> the Registries to coordinate the management of nameservers 
> separate from the Registry-Registrar communication protocol.  
> We are getting to the point where nameservers registered 
> under a .COM or .NET domain are being deleted but are still
> listed as valid for .ORG, .INFO, etc.   I believe the RC 
> should push the
> gTLD Constituency into spearheading the research of a 
> Registry-to-Registry protocol for nameserver management.  
> Such a capability should eliminate the need for Registrars to 
> define "external" nameservers in multiple Registries.
> Regards,
> Mike Lampson
> The Registry at Info Avenue, LLC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On > Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 11:13 AM
> To: 'Bhavin Turakhia'; 'Michael D Palage'; 'Registrars'
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Marina del Rey Registrar Meeting - 
> September 12
> Right, we do that at VeriSign. But it is not ideal because 
> then you end up with creating nameservers for this sole 
> purpose. And does that work with NeuLevel, Afilias, etc.?
> Tim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bhavin Turakhia [mailto:bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:01 AM
> To: 'Tim Ruiz'; 'Michael D. Palage'; 'Registrars'
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Marina del Rey Registrar Meeting - 
> September 12
> > If the registries are willing to be more involved, then 
> perhaps they 
> > could take it upon themselves to agree to cancel these names if the 
> > nameservers in question no longer ping. A separate request 
> to cancel 
> > names of this nature would be submitted, the registry would 
> check them 
> > out, and delete them if appropriate.
> >
> > Other ideas?
> Currently I believe we handle it by simply changing the 
> nameservers to "nameservername.directideleteddomains.com". 
> That works fine for us. Doesn't everyone do that?
> bhavin

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>