[ppml] Policy Proposal -- Eliminate Lame Server policy

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed Sep 12 22:33:01 EDT 2007


Actually, staff would, in my opinion, have greater ability to remove
lame or partially lame delegations and still certainly is free to  
contact
lame server operators or resource holders to encourage them to do
the right thing.

Owen

On Sep 12, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> In cases where a policy must apply uniformly, it has to be official
> and not an internal staff guideline.
>
> The big problem with taking this out of the NRPM is that unless
> there's sanctions available to enforce correct DNS behavior, the
> staff can't do anything because all the non-compliant network
> operator has to do is say since it's not spelled out in the NRPM,
> you can't do anything to me if I don't do it.
>
> At this point I'm personally not sure any changes need to be made
> at all.  But clearly the OP has a problem and the purpose of this
> list and the policy process is essentially to present problems to
> the community and see what the response is.
>
> Thus I think your proposal is as needed as Johns.  If the membership
> really doesen't want the RIR to bother with this, they will vote your
> policy in.  If not, they will vote John's policy in (whenever it's  
> submitted)
> So let's see what they want to do.
>
> Ted
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 8:52 PM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> Cc: John Von Essen; Public Policy Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal -- Eliminate Lame Server policy
>
> Ted,
> I believe you miss the point of my proposal. While I do believe that
> ARIN has a role to play in applying the clue bat to lame or  
> partially lame
> ISPs and addressing John's issue, my point is that it belongs in  
> operational
> guidelines to ARIN staff and not in the NRPM.
>
> My proposal talks about what I think belongs in the NRPM and is
> not a direct expression of how I feel about what ARIN staff should or
> should not be doing with respect to this particular issue. I would  
> fully
> support an ACSP recommendation that ARIN address all IN-ADDR
> lameness whether complete or not on any direct assignment. This will
> potentially require ARIN to examine as many as 255 zones in IPv4 for
> a single assignment.
>
> I would oppose any suggestion requiring ARIN to drill down
> to lame delegations made by the ISPs relating to reassignment or
> reallocations made by the ISP because of dramatically increasing
> workload for dramatically decreasing return on investment and
> because there is a limit to the extent to which I believe ARIN should
> engage in telling operators how to run their network (let alone their
> customers' networks).
>
> I will also oppose any policy regarding the operational and/or
> implementation details of lame delegations because I firmly believe
> this is not the role of the NRPM and should be addressed with
> operational procedures and recommendations rather than with
> number resource policies.
>
> Owen
>
> On Sep 11, 2007, at 5:26 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
>> Yes John you are correct but the way things often work on this  
>> list is someone like Owen will
>> submit a policy to remove something that shouldn't obviously be  
>> removed, the result of
>> which will convert a bunch of fence sitters into proponents of  
>> keeping it.
>> The list membership needs Owens "just kill it" proposal precisely  
>> to have something to
>> vote down. A no vote commits the person voting no, to supporting  
>> the policy.
>> If Owens proposal is voted down, that will destroy all of the  
>> "it's not the RIR's responsibility
>> to enforce sanctions against bad nameserver operators" arguments,  
>> and we can move the discussion
>> to something productive of how to actually fix the problem.
>> Your proposal might be premature - you might find it better to  
>> campaign against Owens
>> proposal first.
>> Ted
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On  
>> Behalf Of John Von Essen
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 4:55 PM
>> To: Public Policy Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal -- Eliminate Lame Server policy
>>
>> I do plan to submit my proposal. My final comment on all of this  
>> is with regards to ARIN's stance on operational issues.
>>
>> I agree ARIN should be careful, but keep in mind ARIN does provide  
>> an operational function of reverse DNS authority delegation.  
>> Because ARIN engages in this very-real activity, policy must exist  
>> to cover its implementation, design, and overall operational health.
>>
>> If ARIN just did AS numbers and IP allocation, and another  
>> organization did reverse delegation, say Network Solutions, then  
>> YES - ARIN should not get involved with operational issues of  
>> reverse DNS. But that fact is ARIN does do reverse DNS delegation.  
>> When I do a dig on an IP, I see alot of ARIN servers in the output!
>>
>> -John
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2007, at 7:21 PM, Azinger, Marla wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to see a proposal that is along the lines of  
>>> clarifying in addition to Owens proposal to just take it away.  
>>> Hopefully we havnt scared John off and he will give a wack at it.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>> Marla
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On  
>>> Behalf Of
>>> William Herrin
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:32 PM
>>> To: Owen DeLong
>>> Cc: Public Policy Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal -- Eliminate Lame Server policy
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/11/07, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> 1. Policy Proposal Name: Deprecate Lame Server Policy
>>>> 7. Policy statement:
>>>> Delete section 7 from the NRPM
>>>
>>> Owen,
>>>
>>> Are you sure this is the right way to move on this? If we're  
>>> going to
>>> call ISPs "Local Internet Registries," shouldn't we expect them to
>>> behave as internet registries and do the things that internet
>>> registries do, including reallocation and assignment of the RDNS
>>> attached to every IP address?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Bill Herrin
>>>
>>> --
>>> William D. Herrin herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
>>> 3005 Crane Dr. Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
>>> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PPML
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the  
>>> ARIN Public Policy
>>> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the  
>>> ARIN Member Services
>>> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PPML
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the  
>>> ARIN Public Policy
>>> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the  
>>> ARIN Member Services
>>> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> John Von Essen
>> (800) 248-1736 ext 100
>> john at quonix.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the  
>> ARIN Public Policy
>> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the  
>> ARIN Member Services
>> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070912/634aedf1/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list