I won't be at Prague, but this is certainly a topic I'm interested in.
On 25/2/19 6:26 pm, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
>
> Antoin, all,
>
>
>
> for now this is more a question / request to the group, rather than a
> specific agenda slot request – but:
>
>
>
> In the light of the recent attacks
We’d be _very interested_ in seeing a standardized, end-to-end registry-locking
model. Specifically, one in which the registrant signs change requests, and the
registry validates the signatures, and nobody in the registrar path is involved
in any way.
Lack of end-to-end protection was one of t
Hi all
This topic would also be of interest to us. We are currently evaluating
if and how we could realize Registry Lock.
See you
Martin
On 25.02.19 08:26, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
>
> Antoin, all,
>
>
>
> for now this is more a question / request to the group, rather than a
> specific ag
Bill Woodcock wrote:
> We’d be _very interested_ in seeing a standardized, end-to-end
> registry-locking model. Specifically, one in which the registrant signs
> change requests, and the registry validates the signatures, and nobody
> in the registrar path is involved in any way.
How do you see
If a BoF happens in Prague I will certainly attend.
On 25/02/2019 07:26, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
> Antoin, all,
>
>
>
> for now this is more a question / request to the group, rather than a
> specific agenda slot request – but:
>
>
>
> In the light of the recent attacks on registration
All,
At SIDN (for .nl) we have our own form of registry lock called .nl control
(https://www.sidn.nl/en/nl-control?language_id=2). Perhaps this can be used as
input for a joined effort in increasing security around registry/registrar
operations.
Regards,
Marc Groeneweg
On 25/02/2019, 14:57,
Folks,
At .dk we also offer a form form of registry lock, called VID, which I’d like
to redesign at some point. Having a standardised, or at least similar “enough”
product offering across different registries and TLDs would make it much more
attractive for registrants. Even though I won’t be
At .ca and all the TLDs CIRA operates, we have a similar feature of registry
lock.
We are interested in standardization for sure.
There is a regiOps workshop coming up in May in Bangkok. I see a fit there if
regext is not the right place.
Cheers,
Tongfeng
-Original Message-
From: re
If there are people who wish to present/discuss either the security
lock issue or the rdap jcard issue, I suggest we forgo the entirety of
item 4 and maybe even item 2 to regain 15 to 25 minutes of valuable
face-to-face time. These seem like administrative items that can be
done on the mailing list
It would be interesting to explore technical approaches to a standardized
registry locking model, although I suspect some of the approaches that are
technically possible might not prove to be broadly feasible from a
business/contractual perspective.
Regarding the possibility of registry lock su
I imagine that DNS as a communication channel to assure registrant willingness
to change something, similar to CDNS/CDNSKEY, could be quite useful. For
instance, if the name servers that are delegated on the registry are now
pointing to new name servers, and this response is signed by the curre
11 matches
Mail list logo
