DNS |
Sponsored by |
Exponential growth of networks combined with the complexity introduced by IT initiatives e.g. VoIP, Cloud computing, server virtualization, desktop virtualization, IPv6 and service automation has required network teams to look for tools to automate IP address management (IPAM). Automated IPAM tools allow administrators to allocate subnets, allocate/track/reclaim IP addresses and provide visibility into the networks. Here are some examples of what a typical IPAM tool can do...
In his eloquent dissent against approving .XXX, ICANN Board member George Sadowsky talked about blocking and filtering top-level domains. It's a concise statement of a concern that has been identified by various people, including members of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), as an impediment to the new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) program. It's a thorough defense of a common point of view about blocking TLDs, but while no-one can disagree about the fact of blocking, what is the actual effect?
I recently wrote about the encouraging level of DNSSEC adoption among top-level domain name registries, and noted that adoption at the second level and in applications is an important next step for adding more security to the DNS. The root and approximately 20 percent of the top level domains are now signed; it is time for registrars and recursive DNS servers operated by the ISPs to occupy center stage.
At ThousandEyes, we've always been curious about the performance of various public DNS resolvers -- especially since Google threw their hat in the ring back in 2009. We satisfied our curiosity this week, so we thought we'd share the results. Here's how we did it.
The following is a proposal for an "Early Warning" system to resolve one of the remaining impasses between the ICANN Board and the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) as identified in the GAC Scorecard. Based upon phased array radar technology, this proposal is designed to incorporate multiple discrete evaluation phases into the new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) program to provide an integrated and comprehensive early warning system for the GAC in providing advice to the ICANN Board, potential applicants, and the broader Internet community.
One of the essential features of the social compact that makes ICANN viable in its stewardship of the Domain Name system is that the operations of the Contracted Parties, i.e. Registrars and Registries, are governed by the cooperation of the contracted parties and the non-contracted parties, i.e. the stakeholders, in the creation of policy. In ICANN, contracts and other agreements are the method by which this policy is instantiated.
After wading through the various IANA Notice of Inquiry (NOI) submissions I thought I would take a break and do a secondary review of the recently concluded ICANN regional meeting in San Francisco. In doing this review there were three things that kind of jumped out at me as still missing in action.
About two years ago I wrote with concern about Bit.ly's use of Libya's country code. I noted that It's always important to keep in mind that a company can't "own" a domain the way it owns real estate. Now it appears that companies that have built brand names on Libya's country code are facing difficult times.
The recent attack on the Comodo Certification Authority has not only shown how vulnerable the current public key infrastructure is, but also that the protocols (e.g., OSCP) used to mitigate these vulnerabilities once exploited, are not in use, not implemented correctly or not even implemented at all. Is this the beginning of the death of the PKI dragons and what alternatives do we have?
Less than nine months after the DNS root was signed, the rollout of DNSSEC across the Internet's top-level domains is approaching the tipping point. Thanks to the combined efforts of registries around the world, the new security protocol will soon be available to the majority of domain name registrants in almost a quarter of all TLDs.