Discuss mailing list

[Alejandro Bonet <albogoal AT gmail.com>]

Well...

This is a Babel Tower!!

When the system Jeff is coding will be completed, please, tell my how
can i permit my
customers to update their RR records under opennic tlds...


Alejandro Bonet
albogoal AT gmail.com

PD: A registry is a web page.
Another registry is another web page.

There must be an automated protocol between registry web pages to update data,
because to test if a domain is available, dig will be sufficient.

If my web server tries to make a change (triggered allways by an
identified customer) in another web page, it is my web page server
responsability...

Not everybody uses the same programming languages or database models!!

But the data to exchange is clear: Resource Record Changes.

And the roles of web servers is clear also: One client making the
changes, and one server aplying them in the underlying DNS server.

And the identification also: Web page servers with a cripto key pair,
or ssl certificate.

We only need a clear text protocol to make initial tests, and then
cipher it with a good ciphering system... (based of course on
public/private key pairs).


2014-03-09 23:06 GMT+01:00, Jeff Taylor <shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net>:
> Well if I get this reconfigured properly, basically a TLD owner would
> have full control over all the domains within their TLD, and a domain
> owner would have full control over any subdomains within their domain.
> There needs to be varying levels of access to the TLDs and domains.
> Top-level administrators need to be able to make repairs to anything
> that could affect other users.
>
> We cannot have a simple flat model where each user only gets access to
> the domain or TLD they created, or things will break quickly. I've had
> people asking me for help when their zone is broken, and without
> administrative access, I would not be able to provide that help.
>
> On 03/09/2014 03:44 PM, Quinn Wood wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 9, 2014, Jeff Taylor <shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net
>> <mailto:shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net>> wrote:
>>
>>     I don't understand what you mean?
>>
>>     On 03/09/2014 01:24 PM, Quinn Wood wrote:
>>>     Might I suggest a less "top level zone" approach? The stuff
>>>     you're designing could easily be appropriated for intra-zone use.
>>
>> Instead of focusing on one type of zone is being administered (in this
>> case top level ones) the system should be designed so "resellers" can
>> maintain their own delegation of second level zones and so on.
>>
>> Since all levels of zone authority operate basically the same way.
>>
>>
>>
>> --------
>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>> You may unsubscribe by emailing
>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>
>