-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Ordering of UTIL autopull logic needs a tweak to let IANA list be dominant #1325
Comments
👋 @dnsguru Hey there - of course. What you're proposing sounds reasonable to me. My memory on the specifics is a little vague but I believe the original version of the bot tooling that I made for github.com/zmap/zlint already looks at the Is there a timeline you'd like to see these adjustments made by? It will take me a little bit of time to page all of these details back into memory and I'm not sure I'll have a chance before the weekend at the earliest. |
@cpu this is important but not urgent - I can invent a deadline if it helps motivation or bias for action. Separate area of attention, while you'd be under the hood: Testing autopull in presence of "Stubs" Typically we would treat these like .AERO or .PRO's registry-associated-managed stubs akin to ccTLDs as mentioned, but due to the timing of the request, I'd asked them to put those in the PRIVATE section, but really because .РУС was a 2012 round nTLD, it is in the section that is generated by the autopull. Can we, as part of testing the iana txt in the current issue you are reading, test registry associated stubs? |
I will see what I can do 👍
Would you mind filing a separate issue for that and tagging me (or assigning if possible)? I'm open to the idea but I don't know that I'll have time to do both at once this week. |
Will do - lets focus on this one for now, given constraints.
The help is appreciated!
…On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 2:43 PM Daniel McCarney ***@***.***> wrote:
@cpu <https://github.com/cpu> this is important but not urgent - I can
invent a deadline if it helps motivation or bias for action.
I will see what I can do 👍
Separate area of attention, while you'd be under the hood: Testing
autopull in presence of "Stubs"
...
Can we, as part of testing the iana txt in the current issue you are
reading, test registry associated stubs?
Would you mind filing a separate issue for that and tagging me (or
assigning if possible)? I'm open to the idea but I don't know that I'll
have time to do both at once this week.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1325 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJOEV2VO6IQFFQDL2VLTOV665ANCNFSM45DXEKCA>
.
|
Haven't forgotten about this, just overestimated my ability to be at a computer after hours in the summer :-) Hoping to get going soon but also happy to hand this off if someone else is ready to take it on immediately, just shout so we don't duplicate work. |
No worries - that was more housekeeping activity than intended as a nudge
your help is very much appreciated with the project!
…On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 5:57 AM Daniel McCarney ***@***.***> wrote:
Haven't forgotten about this, just overestimated my ability to be at a
computer after hours in the summer :-) Hoping to get going soon but also
happy to hand this off if someone else is ready to take it on immediately,
just shout so we don't duplicate work.
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1325 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJIMW7I7JSDHDLYGJ23TQYTD7ANCNFSM45DXEKCA>
.
|
Only change is to add a URL to the IANA TLD txt file and some comment lines to add context. Doesn't solve #1325 but helps identify the resource to use.
@cpu I made PR #1347 for the IANA txt file - I think I oversimplified the matter ... Looks like there would be some extra complexity for the following reasons:
IANA TXT WOULD include, but ICANN JSON WOULD NOT include:
Some of the challenges that come with this are:
Without this going full "Matryoshka" and expanding the scope too widely on the request to add the IANA TLDs which might be missing or impacting the ICANN section beyond the nTLD items that this autopull process was designed for (re: ccTLDs/IDNccTLDs). ICANN have recently announced that they will auction .WED (the EBERO TLD that triggered this request). That might update it in the JSON (or not, this is new ground). It appears between that and the ccTLDs that might be missing, we might cross streams with the existing legacy stuff, which has all kinds of tech debt on reviewing the non-2012 round stuff that this update would change. At the core of the request here, we want to list names that:
For these, (so just above either I'll make up a called the Jothan Frakes Islands (.JF) and let's for example imagine it has an IDN also of XN--EXAMPLEJF, and include the .WED in the example below. (On the "IDNccTLD" let's set aside the A-Label vs U-Label challenge and just list it as the A-Label) New Section:
This expanded the scope a little but also hopefully shrunk it while increasing the coverage. I am also not opposed to this being a separate automation, but thought it best to keep this in the same tool because it represents a minimal element of additional processing. Hope this is helpful, and @cpu thank you ... and hit me up with any questions or clarifications. |
@dnsguru Thanks, your last comment is very helpful. I've started working on this. I think it'll take a little bit of restructuring but should be achievable. One immediate question, when you called out the core of the request you said:
For that last point when you say "cancelled in the ICANN JSON", do you mean entries with |
Made this to illstrate the various cases here, hopefully it adds clarity vs being more confusing.
|
Thanks, let me noodle with the code and see where I end up. |
For that last point when you say "cancelled in the ICANN JSON", do you mean entries with "contractTerminated" : true, or something else?
Yes, the EBERO handler (currently only one, .wed) should catch this case
where a TLD is in the IANA TLD TXT but shows in the JSON file as
"contractTerminated" : true
and is getting removed by that last part.
I updated the grid in the comment above to help be more clear
|
Great, ty! Here are a few updates from my side after a bit of hacking.
There's unfortunately no date field corresponding to the
As you noticed, the IANA Overall this is a pretty significant lift so the diff isn't going to be a little tweak of the script as much as an overhaul. I'm happy to keep plugging at it but I wanted to make sure to set expectations in terms of the volume of code that will need to be reviewed. |
Ok.. What could we trim back to MVP this in order to get the basic part?
The pulling the iana txt file in and lowercasing it seems simple, but
assessing what is easy or hard from that point is not obvious to me.
I will read the code closer this eve and see if I can pivot the request.
|
…1347) * newgtlds.go : update Autopull - Added URL for the IANA PSL for #1325 Only change is to add a URL to the IANA TLD txt file and some comment lines to add context. Doesn't solve #1325 but helps identify the resource to use. * Update tools/newgtlds.go Co-authored-by: Daniel McCarney <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Daniel McCarney <[email protected]>
Was autoclosed by #1347 ; re-opening |
@cpu could this get a revisit |
@dnsguru Sorry, I'm not available to commit to this work right now. |
@dnsguru I need some time to look into the conversation and parse all the comments. As the logic is in Go, I may be able to work on it. Perhaps it could be beneficial if you and I have a quick chat, so that you help me with a short gist of the required changes, without me having to go through the whole conversation and construct it. That will probably help me to speed up the requirement gathering phase, and jump straight to the implementation phase. |
@weppos Thank you -this would be appreciated - can zoom or meet online at a
time that works well between UTC-7 and your local time in EU.
ICANN 75 is imminent as is travel and most cycles are going into
preparatory work for that and responsibilities in #dayjob / #icann policy
prep
WIll you be in Kuala Lumpur for ICANN 75? Would be good to whiteboard this
face to face. Otherwise, perhaps after I return from KL closer to the end
of the month. I hope to speak with IANA and OCTO about how this issue
with Israel's ccTLD IDN happened (#1595) and how we all can better avoid
the matter in the future via automation and communication, collaboratively.
…On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 2:53 AM Simone Carletti ***@***.***> wrote:
@dnsguru <https://github.com/dnsguru> I need some time to look into the
conversation and parse all the comments. As the logic is in Go, I may be
able to work on it.
Perhaps it could be beneficial if you and I have a quick chat, so that you
help me with a short gist of the required changes, without me having to go
through the whole conversation and construct it. That will probably help me
to speed up the requirement gathering phase, and jump straight to the
implementation phase.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1325 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJKAZNC3FJUCANNPRRDV5MCKRANCNFSM45DXEKCA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
@danderson Would you be able to do this, if it hasn't been done already? |
@cpu can we revisit the AUTOPULL Bot?
There is a modification needed - I was investimagating the issue in #1176 and think that we need a review and change in the logic for what makes the autopull so that if there is something in the IANA TLD list (which is basically a list of the root TLDs) but not in the autopull JSON that is sourced from the contracting / cancels NOR in the greater PSL, that the TLD gets added/included.
Example: .WED - in IANA list and active TLD, but not in PSL
.WED was a TLD that was picked up and now operates under EBERO, which is a program at ICANN that has an assigned provider continue operations for TLDs - helping keep TLDs operational when they close due to whatever circumstance.
The TLD appears programatically in the JSON as the other cancelled TLDs, but the TLD still remains in the root zone.
By letting the IANA list be the override, it would catch intances of new IDN TLDs for ccTLDs and include them, plus any fresh ccTLD Delegations if they occur.
These may or may not have the typical meta information that nTLDs do, but inclusion vs not having them is preferred. These could be included in-line with the alphabetized nTLDs, or aggregated at the end of the nTLDs in a small section of their own inside the #ICANN section.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: