[ppml] Policy Proposal 2005-3: Lame Delegations

[Owen DeLong]

> What if:
>     o if a server for one zone out of "many" for an address range is lame
>       but the rest are okay, is the one zone "delisted?"
[snip]

If the server to which ARIN delegates answers with either referrals for
more specifics (2317 or /24 from /16, etc.) or Zone Data (SOA, PTR, etc.),
then, that server is not LAME.  Servers to which that server delegates are
not and should not be part of what is considered in this proposal.  The
entity running the delegating server should develop and implement their
own policy towards their downstreams.  Hopefully this would be consistent
with BCP and standards.

[summary:]
Question of Purpose:
	o	Global DNS Protect
	o	WHOIS Cleanup
[snip]

I do not see this proposal as targeted specifically at either of these
concerns, and, I don't see them as mutually exclusive.  I would like  to
see this as a start towards both issues.  I think that leaving the NS
information in WHOIS with a "LAME" marker on it, and, removing it from
the DNS is the ideal solution if contact and resolution cannot be achieved.

Again, I do not think that ARIN should take any action in regards to
data or DNS entries which are not delgated by ARIN (e.g. LAME SWIPs
should not be modified by ARIN, although it would be good if ARIN
contacted the upstream supplying the SWIP under the first part of
this policy).

Anyway, just my $0.02.

Owen

-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20050320/3031e035/attachment.sig>