Re: [sig-dns]George's lastly: De-listing

[Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>]

On Monday, May 19, 2003, at 15:27 Canada/Eastern, Edward Lewis wrote:

> At 8:55 +1000 5/2/03, George Michaelson wrote:
> > Lastly, the table of lameness definitions, identifying which criteria 
> > are to be
> > acted on in de-listing. I expect us to be able to define some tests 
> > of lameness
> > which include measures we are confident are 'lame' but are not 
> > serious enough,
> > or reliable/deterministic, to act on. The APNIC sweep is going to 
> > need to use
> > only the criteria which are more deterministic.
> How hard is it to request a delegation (be put back) in the DNS?
>
> Removing a delegation is not the same as de-registering the network 
> prefix, it is not the same as discouraging the routing of the address. 
>  Keeping the action in perspective might help - we are simply editing 
> the DNS, not the network.
>
> Is it worth noting lameness in the whois service?
>
> Personally, I don't have an answer, but someone might have an opinion 
> to contribute.
George's proposal included adding a 'disable' mechanism to registry, so 
domain objects could exist in the registry without the corresponding 
delegations existing in the DNS.

The approach he suggested was to add a special token to the remarks: 
field in an RPSL domain object, so the fact that a delegation was 
disabled would be visible via the usual mechanisms (whois, etc).


Joe