[ppml] Policy Proposal -- Eliminate Lame Server policy

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Wed Sep 12 09:34:22 EDT 2007

In a message written on Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 09:29:07PM -0700, David Kessens wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 10:52:32PM -0400, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > With several recent issues staff has indicated a reluctance to take
> > action if items were not spelled out in the NRPM.  There is at least
> > one proposal for the next meeting aimed at giving staff more clarity
> > in the NRPM so they have backing to take action.
> This is not something you can fix by means of spelling out more and
> more operational details in policies. In fact, this would make the
> problem worse.

You misunderstood my statement.

I don't want to add operational details to the NRPM, and I think
the debate about what is a "lame" server only reenforces why that
is a bad idea.  If there are operational details in the NRPM they
should be removed.

However, my fear is that without section 7.2 ARIN staff will feel
they have no authority to police DNS delegations.

       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070912/c3a308c6/attachment.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list