On 4/9/13 4:23 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
It's about time certification was lost for failure to handle AAAA
records. The same should also apply for DS records.
You can suggest this to the compliance team. It seems to me (registrar
hat == "on") that in 2.5 years time, when Staff next conducts a
registrar audit, that this is a reasonable expectation of an
accreditation holding contracted party. It simply needs to be added to
the base RAA agreement.
Joe _may_ be in a position to encourage the compliance team to develop
a metric and a test mechanism, but at present, the compliance team
appears to be capable of WHOIS:43 harvesting (via Kent's boxen) and
occasional WHOIS:80 scraping, and little else beyond records
reconciliation for a limited sample. NB, investing equal oversight
labor in all current (and former) RAA holders is (a) a significant
duplication of effort for little possible benefit where shell
registrars are concerned, and (b) treats registrars (and their
registrants' interests in fair dealing) with a few hundreds of domains
and registrars (and their registrants' interests) with 10% or more of
the total gTLD registry market indifferently by policy and enforcement
tool design. The latter means most registrants (those with performance
contracts from registrars with 10% market share) receive several
orders of magnitude less contractual oversight protections than
registrants using registrars with a few hundred "names under management".
IMHO, that's a problem that could be fixed.