[Chapter-delegates] Should DNSSEC be mandatory for all new gTLDs?

[Franck Martin]

Where ICANN is run by the marketing people and not anymore the users... (cf WHOIS review) 

DNSSEC must be mandatory as well as IPv6. 

What could be done, is not to make it mandatory before say end of 2012. Verisign, Affilias, ...(the back-end operators that 80% of new gTLDs will use) have just started to roll it out, and I bet they'd like to charge a premium for that feature, and they may not feel yet fully confident to roll it out as a standard feature. 

So make it mandatory, but give a bit of time for new gTLDs to roll it out. 




Franck Martin 
http://www.avonsys.com/ 
http://www.facebook.com/Avonsys 
http://www.linkedin.com/company/avonsys 
twitter: FranckMartin Avonsys 

Check your domain reputation: http://gurl.im/b69d4o 
Application Monitoring: http://gurl.im/4d39Gu 



From: "Sivasubramanian M" <isolatedn at gmail.com> 
To: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl at gih.com> 
Cc: "Chapter Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> 
Sent: Friday, 8 April, 2011 11:42:13 AM 
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Should DNSSEC be mandatory for all new gTLDs? 


Dear Olivier, 

This debate ought to separate the need for DNSSEC from the cost considerations. The focus of the initial discussions need to be on the significance and effectiveness (of DNSSEC as a Security process). With cost considerations separated for later, I would seek to include ccTLDs and IDNs within the scope, if not for mandated implementation, at least for a strong recommendation from ICANN. 


Cost of DNSSEC implementation could come down as DNSSEC becomes more widely adopted. If it is still too expensive for new gTLDs, ICANN could consider creating a non-profit DNSSEC consultancy wing, possibly with help from ISOC with consultants paid by ICANN / ISOC with possible funding from International Governments to offer PART of the services related to DNSSEC implementation free to those new gTLDs that may not have attained a comfortable revenue stream. 


Thank you.. 



On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond < ocl at gih.com > wrote: 


The subject says it all. 
A discussion is currently taking place in ICANN's At-Large community 
whether DNSSEC should be or should not be mandatory for all new gTLDs. 

Proponents of the mandatory inclusion say that it will make every new 
gTLD more secure. 
Proponents of the optional inclusion say that it is too costly and 
should be chosen on a case by case basis, if it makes commercial sense. 

I'd like to hear the opinions of Internet Society chapters, please. Thanks! 

Olivier 

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD 
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html 

_______________________________________________ 
Chapter-delegates mailing list 
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org 
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates 


_______________________________________________ 
Chapter-delegates mailing list 
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org 
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110408/9a98fb22/attachment.htm>