[consult] Call for Community Consultation - Lame Delegation Information in WHOIS

[Edward Lewis]

After some more chattering, I feel compelled to change an opinion of mine.

On the matter of whether or not the lame delegation ought to appear 
in WhoIs, I still don't like to label the offender with a scarlet L 
[0] but there might be an operational reason to do so.

Say one /24 NS set is pulled from a /20.  A "relying operator" may 
wonder why the /24 is missing and might conclude that it is an ARIN 
omission.  If a notice in the WhoIs exists, that might reduce the 
time ARIN staff has to spend fielding calls for such a situation. 
(We have a similar situation, we deployed an IPv6-only name server 
for a TLD and now some people are asking if the A record fell out of 
our zone - so I had to go write a "prepared statement" for the 
helpdesk to use.  Man I *hate* having to do actual "work!")

So, if at the staff's discretion, listing lame entries in the WhoIs 
will/is thought to/ reduce the number of false-positive complaint 
calls or at least the time spent on the calls that do arrive, I would 
agree to listing the lame entries.  I still would prefer an 
alternative notification process - but being at a loss to suggest 
something that is a better idea, I'll leave that up to staff 
discretion and imagination. ;)  (Such as "www.arin.net/Lamers")

Obscure literary references:
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarlet_Letter


At 15:14 -0400 10/12/07, Edward Lewis wrote:
>At 11:15 -0400 10/9/07, Member Services wrote:
>
>>The complete suggestion can be viewed at:
>>http://www.arin.net/acsp/suggestions/2007-29.html
>>
>...
>22>1) Is it necessary to indicate which delegations are lame within the
>>network block within WHOIS?
>>2) If yes, how should this information be displayed in WHOIS?
>
>As the suggester, I'm for per zone enforcement.  To answer the two
>issue questions:
>
>1) No.
>2) See #1 ;)
>
>I don't think that the goal is punishment or labeling because this
>might have other repercussions (esp. if space is returned and
>reused).  The goal is to make the DNS work better.  So, once efforts
>to get the situation fixed have been unsuccessful,  all that is
>needed is to drop the offending NS RRs from the zone file.
>
>This is a DNS issue, not really a registry issue.
>--
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
>NeuStar
>
>Think glocally.  Act confused.
>_______________________________________________
>ARIN-Consult
>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the 
>ARIN Consult Mailing
>List (consult at arin.net).
>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/consult Please contact the 
>ARIN Member Services
>Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Think glocally.  Act confused.