Part 5 of 5; New gTLD SSR-2: Exploratory Consumer Impact Analysis
Throughout this series of blog posts we’ve discussed a number of issues related to security, stability and resilience of the DNS ecosystem, particularly as we approach the rollout of new gTLDs. Additionally, we highlighted a number of issues that we believe are outstanding and need to be resolved before the safe introduction of new gTLDs can occur – and we tried to provide some context as to why, all the while continuously highlighting that nearly all of these unresolved recommendations came from parties in addition to Verisign over the last several years. We received a good bit of flack from a small number of folks asking why we’re making such a stink about this, and we’ve attempted to meter our tone while increasing our volume on these matters. Of course, we’re not alone in this, as a growing list of others have illustrated, e.g., SSAC SAC059’s Conclusion, published just a little over 90 days ago, illustrates this in part:
The SSAC believes that the community would benefit from further inquiry into lingering issues related to expansion of the root zone as a consequence of the new gTLD program. Specifically, the SSAC recommends those issues that previous public comment periods have suggested were inadequately explored as well as issues related to cross-functional interactions of the changes brought about by root zone growth should be examined. The SSAC believes the use of experts with experience outside of the fields on which the previous studies relied would provide useful additional perspective regarding stubbornly unresolved concerns about the longer-term management of the expanded root zone and related systems.
Part 4 of 5; NXDOMAINS, SSAC’s SAC045, and new gTLDs
In 2010, ICANN’s Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) published SAC045, a report calling attention to particular problems that may arise should a new gTLD applicant use a string that has been seen with measurable (and meaningful) frequency in queries for resolution by the root system. The queries to which they referred involved invalid top-level domain (TLD) queries (i.e., non-delegated strings) at the root level of the domain name system (DNS), queries which elicit responses commonly referred to as Name Error, or NXDomain, responses from root name servers.
Update on Verisign’s IDN Implementation Plans
The composition of the internet’s population has seen a dramatic shift over the last two decades. In 1996, the majority of end users were based in the U.S.; according to a 2012 Comscore report, the non-English speaking internet population has grown to 87 percent, with more than 40 percent based in the Asia-Pacific region. In order to embrace this population shift, we believe the internet must become multilingual so it can be accessible and relevant to the majority of end users today.
Part 3 of 5: Name Collisions, Why Every Enterprise Should Care
Do you recall when you were a kid and you experienced for the first time an unnatural event where some other kid “stole” your name and their parents were now calling their child by your name, causing much confusion for all on the playground? And how this all made things even more complicated – or at least unnecessarily complex when you and that kid shared a classroom and teacher, or street, or coach and team, and just perhaps that kid even had the same surname as you, amplifying the issue! What you were experiencing was a naming collision (in meatspace).
Part 2 of 5: Internet Infrastructure: Stability at the Core, Innovation at the Edge
For nearly all communications on today’s internet, domain names play a crucial role in providing stable navigation anchors for accessing information in a predictable and safe manner, irrespective of where you’re located or the type of device or network connection you’re using. The underpinnings of this access are made possible by the Domain Name System (DNS), a behind the scenes system that maps human-readable mnemonic names (e.g.,www.Verisign.com) to machine-usable internet addresses (e.g., 69.58.187.40). The DNS is on the cusp of expanding profoundly in places where it’s otherwise been stable for decades and absent some explicit action may do so in a very dangerous manner.
Part 1 of 5: Introduction: New gTLD Security and Stability Considerations
Verisign recently published a technical report on new generic top-level domain (gTLD) security and stability considerations. The initial objective of the report was to assess for Verisign’s senior management our own operational preparedness for new gTLDs, as both a Registry Service Provider for approximately 200 strings, as well as a direct applicant for 14 new gTLDs (including 12 internationalized domain name (IDN) transliterations of .com and .net). The goal was to help ensure our teams, infrastructure and processes are prepared for the pilot and general pre-delegation testing (PDT) exercises, various bits of which are underway, and the subsequent production delegations and launch of new gTLDs shortly thereafter.
Cloud-Based DDoS Protection and Managed DNS Services Helping to Increase Operational Efficiency and Thwart Large Attacks
As businesses continue to move critical operations online, distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks are increasing in frequency, sophistication and range of targets. In a 2011 Verisign study, 63 percent of respondents reported experiencing at least one attack that year, while 51 percent reported revenue loss as a result of downtime from the attack. Those numbers are undoubtedly higher today as the size, frequency and complexity of DDoS attacks continue to grow. Mitigation against these types of attacks is challenging and generally requires layered solutions across data centers and the cloud management. The success of these attacks and their ability to damage a company’s infrastructure, revenue and reputation is indicative that many IT managers still haven’t found the right protection formula to proactively mitigate them.
Improving the Internet, In Person and Online
As much as the world has become more connected, so that people across the world can collaborate online at any hour of the day (even in the midst of weather events like Sandy), there’s still an important role for conferences that bring people together in person at a specific time and place.
I’ve been reminded of the value of this technical “networking” as I’ve attended some key events related to my own work in recent weeks.
In mid-October, I spent some time at the ICANN 45 meeting in Toronto, the triannual focal point for industry work on domain names (as well as IP “numbers”, the second “N”). Pat Kane, senior vice president and general manager of Verisign’s Naming Services, describes his experiences at this important series as exemplifying “hard work and collaboration.” Good technical consensus, as I’ve learned through my past years in industry forums in cryptography and security, starts with trust. The many introductions and conversations that I enjoyed throughout my visit built on this value.
The Promise of a Better Connected Digital World
Earlier this year, Verisign announced its 2012 Internet Infrastructure Grant program, which called for proposals for basic research with “potential to improve the availability and security of internet access in all parts of the world.” Two proposals would be selected based on criteria of relevance, innovation, feasibility, and overall quality.
It’s my honor now to announce that the program’s distinguished judging panel has reached its decisions. The awards will go to:
- Converged, Secure Mobile Communication Support Through Infrastructure-opportunistic, DHT-based Network Services led by Prof. Z. Morley Mao, University of Michigan (United States) and Prof. Cui Yong, Tsinghua University (China)
- Downscaling Entity Registries for Poorly-Connected Environments led by Prof. Dr. Philippe Cudré-Mauroux, Director, eXascale Infolab, University of Fribourg (Switzerland) and Dr. Christophe Guéret, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (The Netherlands)
Do We Need An IPv6 Flag Day?
In recent interviews about World IPv6 Launch I’ve been asked by several different people whether or not I think there needs to be some kind of a “Flag Day” on which the world all together switches from Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) to the version 6 (IPv6).
I don’t think a flag day is needed. World IPv6 Launch is just the right thing.
It’s worth looking at some previous flag-type days to get a better sense of why.