zdraft1099.html (DRAFT ISOCNZ Zone Transfer Policy)
John, Some feedback for you. Background A primary name server is a name server that gets the data for its zones from local files. Changes to a zone, such as adding domains or hosts, are done at the Primary Name Server. A secondary name server gets the data for its zones from another name server across the network which is authoritative for that zone. The processes of obtaining this zone information (that is the database file) across the network is referred to as a zone transfer. Since bind 8 I believe the nomenclature that has been widely adopted is a "master" nameserver (corresponding to a master zone configured on that host) and multiple "slave" nameservers which keep their copies of the zone up-to-date using zone transfers. Probably makes sense to make use of the current terminology. Zone Transfers will be allowed provided: [...] I think that there are numerous reasons to perform a zone transfer which are not covered here, which would be consistent with the privacy act provision in point 2. It seems to me that the list is unnecessarily restrictive in presuming to know all the reasons an operator might have for performing a zone transfer. I also think that there is nothing wrong with statistics gathering. Understanding trends makes the network a safer place. I do not understand your earlier point that data for statistical analysis would be available on the web, but not by zone transfer... Perhaps I misunderstood it. I would rephrase point (3) to be something like: that it is not for the purpose of allowing, enabling or otherwise supporting the transmission of mass unsolicitited, commercial advertising or solicitatious e-mail. I would also make point (4) a little more general, and allow zone transfers to facilitate "operational network engineering". Is it reasonable for a request not to contain a detailed description of the reason for wanting to perform a zone transfer? What is a reasonable request? Is the idea of this policy to be prepared in the event that a flagrant misuse of the zone data occurs? If so, I think it's a good idea. If the idea is to implement an immediate set of restrictions on zone transfers, and to administer zone transfer access control (including all associated adds, moves and changes) for all secondary nameservers, then I remain slightly dubious :) Joe --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
At 05:46 PM 16-10-99 +1300, Joe Abley wrote:
John,
Some feedback for you.
Thanks for the feedback on both policies Joe. There have been several well thought out proposals which I believe should be incorporated into a redraft of both policies. The only part I have difficulty agreeing with is using Zone Transfers to gather statistics. This is not what Zone Transfers are intended for. Perhaps it is okay if we allow one or two sites to do this but then what right have we got to restrict anyone else? If people want statistics I suggest we mandate that these should be produced by Domainz and made available on a Web page for everyone to see. This seems to me much more practical. Comments? John -- John Vorstermans || We are what we repeatedly do. Technical Manager || - Aristotle Actrix Networks --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Sun, Oct 17, 1999 at 08:24:53AM +1300, John Vorstermans wrote:
The only part I have difficulty agreeing with is using Zone Transfers to gather statistics.
Why?
This is not what Zone Transfers are intended for. Perhaps it is okay if we allow one or two sites to do this but then what right have we got to restrict anyone else?
Zone transfers are simply intended to be a mechanism of transferring zone data. This can be (and is) done for a variety of purposes.
If people want statistics I suggest we mandate that these should be produced by Domainz and made available on a Web page for everyone to see. This seems to me much more practical.
The problem is that there are legitimate reasons for gathering statistics that companies routinely do, which they should not be required to reveal to their competitors. Note that Domainz is a competitor to many other companies engaged in business related to domain registration. ISOCNZ may have a conflict of interest in dictating policy in this instance.
Comments?
As I understand it from the wording in your draft, the privacy act mandates that the information be retrieved to be used consistent with the purpose for which it was supplied to Domainz. Why not just build the policy around the requirements of the privacy act? Why dig deeper and make specific broad restrictions when Domainz cannot know (and should not know) the precise details of their competitors' businesses, and whether any particular use is considered a "reasonable request"? The problem I have with all this is that it doesn't protect the nameholder at all. If I am in the business of spamming, I am already a dark and shady character who will lose no sleep over lying about my intentions when I arrange to be allowed to do zone transfers. On the other hand, if I am a legitimate operator who decides to base a part of my business on particular services for my customers which require access to the full zone data, I either fully disclose my novel idea to my competitors, or lie and run the risk that the basis for that business will be removed suddenly in the future. This seems silly :) Joe --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
Joe Abley wrote
The problem is that there are legitimate reasons for gathering statistics that companies routinely do, which they should not be required to reveal to their competitors. Note that Domainz is a competitor to many other companies engaged in business related to domain registration. ISOCNZ may have a conflict of interest in dictating policy in this instance.
IMHO, ISOCNZ will have no confilict of interest. If we write a policy, Domainz will follow it. If that disadvantages Domainz, then there's a problem with the Domainz business model (I don't think there is :) Even if it does disadvantage Domainz (and I can't honestly see how, Joe), they will follow the policy laid down by the Society. Domainz would not be permitted to not follow an official policy in order to disadvantage a competitor If the policy specifies what stats are required to be on the webpage, that's what will appear. What's next, Joe? ;-) Cheers Mark Harris mark.harris(a)isocnz.org.nz Councillor, Internet Society of New Zealand "A waist is a terrible thing to mind" --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Sun, Oct 17, 1999 at 07:47:00PM +1200, mark(a)tracs.co.nz wrote:
Joe Abley wrote
The problem is that there are legitimate reasons for gathering statistics that companies routinely do, which they should not be required to reveal to their competitors. Note that Domainz is a competitor to many other companies engaged in business related to domain registration. ISOCNZ may have a conflict of interest in dictating policy in this instance.
IMHO, ISOCNZ will have no confilict of interest. If we write a policy, Domainz will follow it. If that disadvantages Domainz, then there's a problem with the Domainz business model (I don't think there is :)
My point wasn't that Domainz would be directly disadvantaged by ISOCNZ policy. My point was that other domain registering companies might well be disadvantaged by ISOCNZ policy, which itself might benefit Domainz.
Even if it does disadvantage Domainz (and I can't honestly see how, Joe), they will follow the policy laid down by the Society. Domainz would not be permitted to not follow an official policy in order to disadvantage a competitor
Again, I wasn't talking about Domainz being given dispensation not to follow policy. I agree with you -- it is difficult to see how any ISOCNZ policy on the NZ TLD could disadvantage Domainz :)
If the policy specifies what stats are required to be on the webpage, that's what will appear.
That's the point, isn't it? Take company A who has a particular (legitimate) requirement to process the zone data in order to provide some service to their customers. Under the policy you're alluding to, they would need to tell Domainz exactly what kind of statistics they are pulling, so that Domainz can put those stats on a web page. So any advantage that company had in its novel business idea has disappeared, because Domainz just published the relevant statistics for all that company's competitors to see.
What's next, Joe? ;-)
Some more thorough reading of what I'm writing, I hope :) Joe --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
At 19:47 17/10/99 +1200,
If the policy specifies what stats are required to be on the webpage, that's what will appear.
This limits the definition of statistics to that set out in the policy, the policy presumably being static and difficult (i.e. slow) to change. As Joe pointed out what is just noise to some people will be useful statistics to others. Cheers, Kirk Alexander --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
It seems that a reasonable amount of feedback has been provided now... When can we expect revised draft policies to be made available? Joe --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
At 09:43 AM 19-10-99 +1300, Joe Abley wrote:
It seems that a reasonable amount of feedback has been provided now... When can we expect revised draft policies to be made available?
I have a meeting with the Technical Committee on Wednesday night. As soon as we can get the next draft together I will let send it to the members list and to the nznog list. I have removed isocnz-l from the crosspost. Cheers John -- John Vorstermans || We are what we repeatedly do. Technical Manager || - Aristotle Actrix Networks --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
It seems that a reasonable amount of feedback has been provided now... When can we expect revised draft policies to be made available?
There is nothing binding about this process, so it really doesnt matter. ISOCNZ and ultimately DOMAINZ will do what it thinks best based on their view of the world. Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED -/- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
The only part I have difficulty agreeing with is using Zone Transfers to gather statistics. This is not what Zone Transfers are intended for. Perhaps it is okay if we allow one or two sites to do this but then what right have we got to restrict anyone else?
If you needed zone transfer data to deliver a service for which you charged a fee, I am sure you would have a different view.
If people want statistics I suggest we mandate that these should be produced by Domainz and made available on a Web page for everyone to see. This seems to me much more practical.
Looks more like an attempt to gain monopoly control of public data to build the value of the DOMAINZ brand. Higgins and O'Brien must be laughing all the way to the bank. They say jump and you lot say "how high?". Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED -/- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
Now we have seen there is no real reason for this policy, other than to extend DOMAINZ property rights, is it time to ask the question why a paid director of DOMAINZ is managing the policy development process? ISOCNZ and DOMAINZ are so closely held, that for all intents and purposes, it can be viewed as a single entity. The only reason there is not a major uproar, is this time it only effects small innovative companies in the registration business like us. But mark my words, DOMAINZ will move onto something that hits other providers in the pocket. By then, it will probably be too late. They will own dot nz, and if anybody challenges it, similar to Telecom, they will have the money and the influence to make sure nobody else gets a look in. Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED -/- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
At 11:20 AM 17-10-99 +1300, Peter Mott wrote:
Now we have seen there is no real reason for this policy....
Only you seem to see that Peter. The Zone transfer issue is an International one. As a society with the best interest of the Internet and it's users at heart, I believe that we have a role to ensure responsible management of the .nz. We are now seeking comment from or members on two polices to which we have had some very good and positive responses. These will go back to the technical committee when a final draft is put together for consideration.
is it time to ask the question why a paid director of DOMAINZ is managing the policy development process?
Because I stood up to be counted. My job on the technical committee is to ensure that things progress. Now if you think that I am corrupted by some desire to rule .nz then you are welcome to such an opinion. However do you really think the Technical Committee of Andy Linton, Roger De Salis, Mark Davies, Jim Shaw and Don Stokes would let me write or dictate policy which was only in the interest of Domainz then you have got be incredibly naive.
The only reason there is not a major uproar, is this time it only effects small innovative companies in the registration business like us.
Or perhaps people see ISOCNZ trying to do something in a positive way and actually welcome the chance to contribute in a positive manner. We have a group of Technical people who have put together a proposal which they believed was sound. However they understand that there might be other issues which have not been considered and have gone out to the members and the Network Operators to gather opinion and feedback. Sounds like a good way too do things if you ask me Peter. Now if you do have concerns why don' you express them in a rational way so they can at least be considered in such light?
But mark my words, DOMAINZ will move onto something that hits other providers in the pocket. By then, it will probably be too late. They will own dot nz, and if anybody challenges it, similar to Telecom, they will have the money and the influence to make sure nobody else gets a look in.
This will never happen while I am a councilor or Board member, I can assure you. Regard John -- John Vorstermans || We are what we repeatedly do. Technical Manager || - Aristotle Actrix Networks --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Sun, 17 Oct 1999, John Vorstermans wrote:
Only you seem to see that Peter. The Zone transfer issue is an International one. As a society with the best interest of the Internet and it's users at heart, I believe that we have a role to ensure responsible management of the .nz.
As a society with these stated goals, how about chipping in on some of the more immediate problems we see - open relays and smurf amplifiers in NZ. Searching for "nz" in the top 2048 smurf amps at http://www.netscan.org/ produces "interesting" results - John, did you know Actrix is in there? Downloading the list of long-term open mail relays at http://www.orbs.org/DAT/inputs.current.txt also produces some interesting data - it's apparent that a lot of admins haven't heard of RFC 2505 (most also seem not to have heard of RFC 821, 822 or 1123 either....) AB --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
participants (6)
-
Alan Brown -
Joe Abley -
John Vorstermans -
Kirk Alexander -
markļ¼ tracs.co.nz -
Peter Mott