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

[Sivasubramanian M]

Dear Frank

Is it really so expensive to implement DNSSEC as it just that the
implementing is pricey ?

Sivasubramaian M

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Franck Martin <franck at avonsys.com> wrote:

> 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 <http://twitter.com/FranckMartin> Avonsys<http://twitter.com/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/20110414/617015a3/attachment.htm>