RE: [EPP-discuss] EPP nameserver admin draft proposal

From: Tom Sommer <>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 08:58:01 +0000

Honestly I completely agree with Marten, but this is not a command we plan on using, so it's not a fight I want to take.

Just require nameserveradministrators to be registrars and build around that.

Tom Sommer
CTO at UnoEuro A/S, a Zitcom A/S division
Phone: +45 69 10 60 09 
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonas Brms Nielsen [] 
Sent: 28. juni 2016 18:04
To: Variomedia AG - Marten Lehmann <>
Subject: Re: [EPP-discuss] EPP nameserver admin draft proposal 
Hello Marten,
I have discussed this with my peers and it is not something we can do, for several reasons.
1. The name server administrator role plays an important role in our DNSSEC implementation as and administrator of DS keys
2. We are not so keen on not having a point of contact for objects on our registry, so in order to fit this in with the current model, the name server administrator has to be defined
> On 17 May 2016, at 17:27, Variomedia AG - Marten Lehmann <> wrote:
> Hello,
>> I have written up a draft for the specification for the unimplemented commands related to manipulation of host objects:
> the create host command is definitely something I'm missing for a while. But when you go for EPP now, wouldn't that be the best moment to get rid of the host contact (dkhm:requestedNsAdmin in the draft)?
> I don't see a real world use case for a host contact. However, I see the typical use case proofing that the contact nowadays isn't used in the way it was originally intended. As a hosting company and domain registrar, we register domain names on behalf of our customers worldwide. If somebody needs to contact us, then surely not because we are listed as a host contact. Most TLD models don't even include a host contact.
> So when we use our nameservers for the delegation of a .dk domain name, then this is the only case when the .dk host contact actually contains valid information: Our contact details. However, these are given in the technical contact as well, so it's sort of redundant.
> In most other cases though, for example when the registrant asks as to use nameservers of GoDaddy, SquareSpace, 1&1, any other ISP or just virtual nameservers of our resellers and they don't exist yet, then we will create those hosts necessarily and we will use our own contact for the mandatory host contact, because we simply have no clue who might be the actual host contact. And even though we are listed as a host contact for several hosts of other ISPs due to this policy for several years (and we really have no capability of managing other ISPs nameservers), no one contacted us so far.
> So instead of adding the dkhm:requestedNsAdmin extension on the host create command, please just abandon this historic piece of the data model.
> Kind regards
> Marten Lehmann
> -- 
> Variomedia AG, August-Bebel-Str. 68, D-14482 Potsdam
> Tel: +49-331-23789-0, Fax: -59, Hotline: 0800-2378900
> Amtsgericht Potsdam, HRB 19749, USt-IdNr.: DE211928621
> Vorstand: Marten Lehmann, Justus Pilgrim
> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Stefan Matz
Received on Wed Jun 29 2016 - 10:58:01 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Jun 29 2016 - 10:59:00 CEST