On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 10:27:30PM +0000, David Huberman wrote: > Mark Andrews stated: > > >It’s amazing how fast people can fix lame delegations once email and other > >services stop flowing. The only reason you think it is un- winnable is that > >you > >are unwilling to remove the delegation for failing to maintain a properly > >working configuration. > > Ideally, yes – of course. > > But in practical terms, when any type of registry strips away a lame > delegation > attached to a real, operating network with users behind it, and things break > as a result, it has a high potential of affecting the innocent 3rd parties > using that > network. Especially at scale, the legal liability issues implicated by such > an action > are frightening, and quickly outweigh the ‘for the common good’ arguments.
As long as there is community support Mark's observation works as expected. Slightly variatios of this policy are in place for LACNIC and APNIC regions and is very effective. http://www.lacnic.net/686/2/lacnic/6-lame-delegation-policy https://www.apnic.net/manage-ip/manage-resources/reverse-dns/lame-dns-reverse-delegation/ Fred _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
