As promised in Philadelphia, here is my review of draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops-01.
Basically, the document is, IMHO, ready for publication. Although it is not crystal clear in the document itself (I regret it), it describes the *current* practices of AS112 operators and regards as off-topic the future changes to these practices (such as the adoption of RFC 5001 to replace hostname.as112.net). AS 112 is an important part of the Internet infrastructure and certainly deserves a documentation. This one is well-written and seems complete (disclaimer: I do not operate an AS112 node and I tried the instructions only in the lab) Editorial issues: 2.2 : may be mentioning the IP addresses of the name servers is useless (and may be problematic, should they change)? I understand their usefulness in actual zone files present in the RFC but not here. 3.4 : the router ID given as an example should really come from RFC 3330 instead 4.1 : an issue I reported in my June 2007 review has not been addressed, apparently: The I-D does not say if the operator should monitor the public IP address (which requires a monitor in the BGP "drainage basin") or the "private", the management one. (Without practical experience of anycast, I cannot suggest a response.) 7 : "The deployment ... are very loosely coordinated" should be "is very loosely coordinated".
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
