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. Eric
