ICANN87 · Bali · Commercial Stakeholders Group (CSG) · GNSO · October 2026
A proposal for an optional, access-controlled, verifiable daily delta for every TLD zone file a user is already authorized to receive.
Leo Angelo · Hafiz Farooq
zonedata.org
Draft for discussion · Version 1.0 · September 2026
1 · Summary
CZDS should offer an optional, access-controlled, verifiable daily delta for every TLD zone file a user is already authorized to receive.
2 · The current inefficiency
Every participant builds the same miniature data-engineering platform: bulk transfer, parsing, normalization, storage, comparison.
Consumers also disagree on the result. Different parsing, ordering, TTL, RRset and nameserver-change logic produce hundreds of private interpretations of one change.
3 · Who benefits, and how
| CSG constituency | Benefit |
|---|---|
| Business users (BC) | New and changed domains visible to security and brand teams at publication time, with no bulk-download infrastructure to build; smaller teams participate on equal footing. |
| Brand owners (IPC) | A watched or confusingly similar name appears as an explicit, timestamped, signed event; delta records provide verifiable evidence of when a domain appeared or changed. |
| ISPs and connectivity providers (ISPCP) | Delegation and DNSSEC changes as early operational and abuse signals, consumable directly by resolver and abuse pipelines. |
Same data, same cadence, same approved recipients; delivered sooner, interpreted identically, verifiable by anyone.
4 · The proposed service
Additive, not disruptive. The full file stays the baseline for new users, recovery, audit and rebuilds. The delta is an opt-in companion output.
Deltas only for TLDs the user is already authorized to receive.
Phase 1: generated centrally by CZDS from consecutive daily snapshots. One signed, sequence-numbered artifact per TLD per day.
Whatever the format, it must be verifiable and replayable; a proposed technical profile is published as a starting point at zonedata.org/appendix.
5 · Scope
| In scope: derived from the existing published zone | Not in scope |
|---|---|
| Domain names already present in the zone | Registrant name |
| DNS RRsets, principally delegation-related records | Registrant email address |
| NS, DS, glue, and relevant record changes | Registrant telephone number |
| Add / delete / update events | Registrant postal address |
| Timestamps, sequences, hashes, correction metadata | WHOIS or RDAP registration data |
| Existing approved-recipient access controls | Lead lists, identity enrichment, or contact data |
This is not a WHOIS or RDAP proposal. It does not expand access rights.
6 · Commercial services benefits
Commercial differentiation remains in
A basic daily list of added, deleted or changed zone entries is a low-level infrastructure output.
The market opportunity shifts upward: validation, accuracy monitoring, semantic normalization, vertical solutions, premium distribution.
7 · Proof of concept
In the full .net zone file (generated 2026-09-21)
zone-delta.net. 172800 in ns launch1.spaceship.net. zone-delta.net. 172800 in ns launch2.spaceship.net. zone-delta.net. 86400 in ds 27062 13 2 106E2DDFCB22B19B4D8038706B8B12D2B968396B476BE642B2C3417E99455F0F
In the delta: what a consumer receives, one event per change
8 · Food for thought
The same technical profile can serve any zone whose manager chooses to publish a delta through it.
Requested today: support from the CSG constituencies - BC, IPC, ISPCP - for a letter to ICANN org asking for a scoped feasibility assessment leading to a limited pilot: an initial set of gTLD zones, existing approved users, full files retained, published metrics.
No policy change. No new access rights. No registrant data.
Compute the change once. Distribute it securely to the parties already entitled to it.
Proposal, technical appendix, FAQ: zonedata.org · a non-commercial resource
Backup
Full requirements profile, event schema and canonicalization questions: technical appendix at zonedata.org/appendix
Backup
| Fixing it delivers | Practical result |
|---|---|
| Less duplicated bulk transfer | Lower bandwidth, storage I/O, and processing cost |
| Common change semantics | Consistent interpretation across users |
| Better integrity and auditability | Replay, verification, reproducibility |
| Lower barrier to legitimate use | Researchers and smaller security teams can participate |
| Retained full files | No loss of baseline, rebuild, or audit capability |
The benefit is not that one user downloads fewer bytes. An ecosystem stops recreating the same mechanical transformation thousands of times and competes on the value created from the data.
Each slide has its own address, for example zonedata.org/proposal/slides/#7.