[ppml] Policy Proposal 2005-3: Lame Delegations
Ed.Lewis at neustar.biz
Thu Apr 14 13:46:16 EDT 2005
At 9:18 -0700 4/14/05, Azinger, Marla wrote:
>That said...if anyone should choose to suggest changes to the actual Policy
>and its "meaning" then I urge you to bring it up seperately at the open
>sessions so that your concerns get heard and evaluated. AND so that we do
>not bog down our proposal to "modify" the "notification process" within the
If there is interest in doing this, I'll pitch in.
On Sunday I plan to do some slides during the open policy discussion
on "Community-Provided Technical Guidance to ARIN." The impetus for
the slides are issues such as the lame delegation policy.
I have some first hand knowledge on the topic of lame delegation and
the ARIN policy. Having once been on staff, one of my duties
involved researching, measure, and implementing tools in support of
the policy. Given the appropriateness of ARIN's confidentiality
policy I won't go into details, give size estimates, nor cite
specific "interesting" cases. However, I can say that the policy as
written left a lot open to interpretation.
By that I mean, when I wrote the tools, I made simplifying
assumptions because there was little documentation behind the
original policy and little guidance in the policy regarding the
testing parameters. Detecting lame delegations is not as
straightforward as it sounds. (My slides Sunday propose a WG, which
might be what would have helped me in making more informed
assumptions.) The assumptions were mine - history has shown me that
I do not always make wise decisions.
Note, not an attack on any judgement(s) made by staff, just speaking
from experience of one-time implementer who would have appreciated
better metrics by which to know when my code was "done."
That being said - the modification (policy 2005-3) solves a problem
with the original policy (2002-1). It is needed. The reporting
scheme indicated in 2002-1 is overly burdensome. The modification is
better because it allows the staff now to use it's judgement in how
to report lame delegations.
My questions regarding the original policy are not critical, but I
have a mild engineer's burn to iron them out. I think it would be
good for community members to think about how far we want the staff
to go in hunting and eliminating lame delegations. This is something
needing a discussion in a working group-like setting, not a policy
statement. (Again, another plug for my slides on Sunday.)
If this is something only I am concerned with, I'll just let it go.
My concerns are not deep-seated and there are plenty of other things
to work on.
Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.
More information about the ARIN-PPML