This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/dns-wg@ripe.net/
[dns-wg] Delegation checking policy/procedure at ARIN
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Delegation checking policy/procedure at ARIN
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Delegation checking policy/procedure at ARIN
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Patrik Fältström
paf at cisco.com
Tue May 13 12:00:09 CEST 2003
On måndag, maj 5, 2003, at 21:55 Europe/Stockholm, Brad Knowles wrote: > Specifically, I was thinking about a distributed collection script > and a centralized checking facility, where results could be posted to > the appropriate mailing lists and newsgroups, in much the same way as > the reports made by Rob Thomas to the NANOG mailing list (especially > his "lame delegation" report at <http://www.cymru.com/DNS/lame.html>). At the meeting in Barcelona I will describe my findings with my tool (http://dnscheck.paf.se/) which uses the dns verification script which runs on http://paf.se/domain/. You can also download the script (perl) and use yourself, under a BSD like license. I am sorry for being so late with the statistics collections I am now finally ready with, after working on this for 4 years or so... Anyway, the meta-questions I have found need some sort of answers are: - What is a proper set of requirements a registry set on operations of a child zone? (One can argue the registry should not care, BUT, in reality they do. The answer can be "do not care", but then it should be said very loud.) - What is a proper set of requirements one can set on a DNS operator, i.e. one which run DNS for a zone, a hosting service? Yes, they can differ, and should differ as for example tld for "se" should have different requirements than the local butcher shop (maybe). I at least see this list of "proper dns" is different from the _requirements_ a registry set. - Is the requirements different between in-addr.arpa delegations from the normal {cc,g}TLD delegations? If so, why? Note, I am really trying hard to only talk about technical things. No policy issues. Yes, a policy is that some technical hoops need to be passed, but, the technical requirements themselves is what I want to discuss. More at the DNS meeting. paf
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Delegation checking policy/procedure at ARIN
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Delegation checking policy/procedure at ARIN
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]