On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Andrew Dul <[email protected]> wrote:
> It would be helpful for this discussion if ARIN staff could produce a > brief statement on the current state of how this section has been > implemented within ARIN's operational procedures. I assume some of this > will come later with the staff assessment, but a limited response might > be helpful for the community to understand how this change would effect > ARIN's current operational procedures. Andrew - Short answer: The policy change would sustain current operational practices When we switched over to per-zone DNS management, we ran into significant issues with lame detection and remediation, including the appropriate definition of a 'lame' dns server and potential risk of removing misconfigured but working reverse DNS servers in some cases. As a result of these issues, we suspended lame testing and Mark Kosters reported on them in the "Lame Testing" Report at the ARIN 24 meeting in October 2009 <https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_XXIV/PDF/wednesday/lame.pdf> We are prepared to reinstate lame DNS reverse testing, marking, and potentially even removal of "lame" name servers from the whois records if the community can provide more specific guidance on lame definition. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
