Subject: [DNSOP] automatic update of DS records

From: Tony Finch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 08:37:47 +0000

What are the arguments against using somthing like RFC 5011 to
automatically update DS records? (If you can do that I suppose
you could update the rest of the delegation too.)

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <[email-masked]>  http://dotat.at/
GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS.
MODERATE OR GOOD.

---

From: Paul Wouters <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:20:29 -0500 (EST)

> you could update the rest of the delegation too.)

"Timers vs Triggers". Look through the archive.

In short, RFC5011 puts the error of not catching up at the parent.
Lawyers (and some TLDs) don't like that, and prefer children push updates
to the parent instead.

Paul

---

From: Tony Finch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:25:58 +0000

> "Timers vs Triggers". Look through the archive.

I'm afraid I could only find a few bits and pieces about updating trust
anchors, but nothing about updating delegations.

> Lawyers (and some TLDs) don't like that, and prefer children push updates

Even so, wouldn't it be useful to specify a standard way for parent zones
to automatically update their delegations? If some people don't like the
idea it would still be useful for those that do.

Note that it doesn't have to be implemented by a registry. A registrar
could monitor its domains and automatically push updates into EPP.

Tony.

---

From: Mark Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:49:07 +1100

In message <[email-masked]>, Paul Wout
> Lawyers (and some TLDs) don't like that, and prefer children push updates

Unfortunately we all know how well that works for glue NS records
and glue address records.  It might keep the lawyers happy but it
doesn't help the stability of the global DNS.  Keeping delegation
accurate is a shared responsability according to RFC 1034.
Unfortunately lots of registries don't appear to care about it.

That said I still think it should be a push from the child with the
parent running regular consistancy checks on the delegation information
and chasing up inconsitancies.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]

---

From: Wolfgang Nagele <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:12:48 +0100

Hi,

> you could update the rest of the delegation too.)
There has been some work on a draft for this after an inofficial BoF during the
Stockholm IETF. So far it did not make it to the light of day because of claimed
intellectual property issues. Anybody interested can contact me for more details.

Regards,
Wolfgang