[dns-wg] Delegation checking policy/procedure at ARIN

Dear Jim and Mohsen,

On 16:25 14/05/03, Jim Reid said:
> >>>>> "JFC" == JFC (Jefsey) Morfin <jefsey at jefsey.com> writes:
>
>     JFC> When I cannot register a ".fr" or a ".tp" name because of the
>     JFC> retsrictions imposed by their NICs I am upset. I would prefer
>     JFC> - and I would be gratefull - if they told me what is wrong I
>     JFC> could correct when I want, but securing the DN in the
>     JFC> meanwhile?
>
>This is really something to discuss with the registry concerned.

We are just talking of restrictions imposed by registry BPs.
BPs should say that restrictions are to be documented both
in plain text and decribing case per case the tested reasons
of a denial so one can document when the testing is wrong.

BPs should also say that the intended registration should
be valid when the denial of registration is due to its wrong
analysis of the registrant configuration. There is no reason
why the first come first served rule would defeated by an
error of the Registry.

BPs could say that the registry should provide its proposed
DNS configuration, so the Registrant could implement it to
get registered.

>    JFC> Example: when the nameserver is on the same machine as the
>     JFC> site, I never understood why I would need two name servers.
>
>Read section 3.3 of RFC2182. In fact, read the whole RFC.

This is exactly the section I find inadequate to the case. We all
know that. The problem is that some Regustries want to enforce
it without discrimination. If the secondary is on the same machine
- as I documented - or on the next one or at the other end of the
world. It will _not_ improve the average response time to get the
information, and will only disseminate a _wrong_ information when
the master and the host on the same machine are down.

Registry BP should force Registries to accept such registration
under the responsiblity of the Registrant as does ".ws". We are
talking about BPs you are going to discuss. Good BPs should
not lead registrants to trick the Registry: it should consider all
the cases and best support the Registrant in every case IMHO.

>    JFC> I would be really interested if Patrick's work permitted
>     JFC> that: to tell me what may be wrong in my files and to teach
>     JFC> me to correcty right them?
>
>Well, someone from AFNIC will be talking about their new delegation
>checking tools and processes at the WG tomorrow. The presentation
>should be on the RIPE web site by early next week at the latest.
>
>I'm hoping the WG will use tomorrow's session on delegation checking
>to work on this topic: perhaps produce a BCP or something like that. If
>this gets under way, it would be useful to get contributions on things
>like the nature of error messages and so on.

Certainly ready to help there.
Will you address IDNA?
jfc
http://eurolinc.org