RE: Defenition of Registry

["Alf Hansen" <Alf.Hansen@uninett.no>]

Scott,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hollenbeck, Scott [mailto:shollenbeck@verisign.com]
> Sent: 3. januar 2001 15:59
> To: 'Alf.Hansen@uninett.no'; ietf-provreg@cafax.se
> Subject: RE: Defenition of Registry
>
>
> Alf,
>
> Could you clarify what you mean by "/responsible/ for the content in the
> repository"?  I agree that a registry should be responsible for database
> integrity etc., but are you suggesting that a registry should be
> responsible
> for maintaining (creates, updates, deletes, etc.) registrar-provided data
> without direct authorization from a registrar (or acting as a registrar
> itself) as well?

No. The registry should be responsible for the content. The registrars will
collect the data based on an agreement (contract) with the registry, and the
registry should provide the registrars with the tools needed to maintain the
database i a secure way: Proper authentication of the registrars, limitation
of consequences after registrar-misbehaviour, logs enabling investigation of
incidents, etc.

There will be a variety of "naming policies" for different TLDs. The
protocol must allow such flexibility in naming policies. The registry is
responsible for the content, and must therefore make sure that the
registrars also follow the rules (the actual naming policy) when they
maintain the database (on behalf of the registry). The protocol must be a
technical tool both for the registrars and the registry, assisting them to
provide cost effective, high quality registration services to the
registrants (customers).

The protocol is not policy, but a technical tool.

>
> Scott Hollenbeck
> VeriSign Global Registry Services
>

Best regards,
Alf H
.NO