[ppml] Policy Proposal: Modification to Reverse Mapping Policy

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Sep 12 17:48:22 EDT 2007

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>Scott Leibrand
>Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 2:15 PM
>To: Dean Anderson
>Cc: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Modification to Reverse Mapping
>Not quite.  ARIN's current operational policy requires that all zones 
>for a given registration be lame before considering the registration 
>lame, and triggering the notification and removal process.  

>If a 
>registrant gets a /22, and only sets up reverse DNS for one /24, ARIN 
>does not take action against the other three zones (/24's).  This seems 
>to be an artifact of the fact that you define a single set of DNS server 
>per registration, not per zone (/24, /16, or /8),

No, not at all.  ARIN allows people to request more subnets than their
existing allocation, if they are returning subnets (for purposes of
aggregation)  This implies some of those /24's are going to be unused.

A network that does not have all /24's in use might choose to make the
/24's in their inventory that are not yet deployed, lame.  This would
cause anyone on the Internet who happens to misconfigure
something that sends data to those numbers, to immediately have problems.
Since those subnets are not in use, this would be desired behavior.

Would you rather have them break their /22 into multiple BGP advertisements
and only advertise their in-use subnets instead of an aggregated /22?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list