[ppml] Comments on ARIN's reverse DNS mapping policy
bonomi at mail.r-bonomi.com
Tue Sep 11 02:49:46 EDT 2007
> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 02:19:40 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Sam Weiler <weiler at tislabs.com>
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Comments on ARIN's reverse DNS mapping policy
> I'm wondering if it would be sufficient to have ARIN act _far_ more
> swiftly to remove the lame delegations. While that wouldn't get good
> PTR records published, it should cure the long timeout problem.
Does an inompletely populated zone constitute a 'lame' server?
Does a zone with _no_ data other than a SOA constitute a 'lame' server?
Is a server that fails to return NXDOMAIN in a _timely_ manner for
something it doesn't know about a 'lame' server?
It's not at all clear to me that requiring faser action for 7.2 addresses
any of those situations.
My understading of a lame server is one that is listed (elsewhere) as
'authoritative' for a zone, but does NOT report itself as athoritative
Policy is that the zone has to 'be there'. I haven't found anything that
says abot 'if' or 'what' has to be in the zone -- beyond the SOA that makes
it 'authoritative', that is.
More information about the ARIN-PPML