On 27 Jul 2021, at 16:15, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: >> * Section 5: Promoted or orphan glue >> The considerations for handling orphan glue will be different for a >> TLD vs a lower level zone within a domain. I would think that orphan >> glue in a TLD context should go away when a zone is deleted/expired. >> Maybe even have sanity checking to prevent such an operation. > > This is a political question, not a technical one. If the DNS operator > has external knowledge that the orphan's domain has not been delegated > to someone else, you can make a case to leave the glue. The usual > example is a name in a TLD which has expired but is still in the grace period, > but it can happen anywhere someone delegates names; I run registries > at the third level like watkins-glen.ny.us. > > I don't see how we can offer any more than general and vague advice here.
I agree, and I think the best plan is to remove any mention of it. Orphan glue is by definition not glue. It once was glue, but that has no bearing on how to craft a referral response. It's out of scope for this document. At best, I think the term "orphan glue" belongs in a taxonomy concerned with registry terminology, not DNS terminology. And although one of the ways in which domain registries publish information is in the DNS, it's rarely a good idea to conflate the two. Joe _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
