[ppml] comments on 2004-3
billd at cait.wustl.edu
Thu Apr 14 12:04:19 EDT 2005
Thanks for the time and consideration..and the explicit feedback you provide
related to these policy proposals. Being concise and specific allows easy
assessment of your comments.
ARIN Advisory Council
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Edward Lewis
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 10:26 AM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Cc: ed.lewis at neustar.biz
> Subject: [ppml] comments on 2004-3
> # End-users not currently connected to an ISP and/or not
> planning to be # connected to the Internet are encouraged to
> use private IP address numbers # reserved for non-connected
> networks (see RFC 1918). When private, # non-connected
> networks require interconnectivity and the private IP address
> # numbers are ineffective, globally unique addresses may be
> requested and # used to provide this interconnectivity.
> I would like to add that these registrations are barred from listing
> name servers.
> If these networks are truly "not...connected to the Internet" then
> there is no reason to list name servers for these networks in the
> Internet-viewable DNS and APID (ARIN Public Information Database).
> There would be no reason for the registrant to operate name servers
> on the public Internet for these unreachable destinations.
> Without barring name servers on these networks, there is potential
> for lame (non-responsive) delegations.
> If a disconnected network numbered under this policy is to be
> connected to the Internet, only then should name servers be permitted.
> I suppose that this policy is not intended to differentiate among
> Internet-connected networks and non-connected. The point of
> restricting name servers is not to differentiate within the policy,
> the point is to limit the spread of lame DNS delegations.
> Edward Lewis
> If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.
More information about the ARIN-PPML