In message <64D1E31C-E56C-4ECE-8198-EE607AC216E9@rfc1035.com>, at 12:51:14 on Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> writes
For the general public, I'd expect most governments and regulators would look to market forces to solve the issues around DNS robustness, just like they tend to rely on market forces to deal with the good and bad ISPs/hosting companies/registrars/etc. Some punters will pay a premium to get a better, more robust service. Others won't.
I agree that many governments and regulators don't currently address the issue of deficient service from telecoms providers. The first step is for there to be an acknowledgement that such a thing as deficient service exists (for example is a provision of one non-redundant NS in any sense "fit for purpose", let alone "complying with industry best practice"). If we can agree (here on this list) that there are many telecoms providers who either lack clue because they've cut costs by employing clueless staff, or have taken a commercial decision to deliver a clueless service, then that's one small step on our long journey. I imagine that such deficiencies are as frustrating to conscientious service providers as they are to the public, as it tends to create a "race to the bottom". -- Roland Perry