To:
Daniel Senie <dts@senie.com>
cc:
plzak@arin.net, dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Bruce Campbell <bruce.campbell@apnic.net>
Date:
Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:07:50 +1000 (EST)
In-Reply-To:
<5.1.0.14.2.20010807173917.00a6b840@mail.amaranth.net>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: comment on draft-ietf-dnsop-inaddr-required-02.txt
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Daniel Senie wrote: > At 05:29 PM 8/7/01, Ray Plzak wrote: > >Providing servers for in-addr service is not the same as setting ptr records > >for hosts. I agree that the managers of space on bit boundaries, ie, /8, > > And this is really a key point. End users should be allowed to use INADDR, > if they want to use it. I've been wrestling with this for a while, in terms > of what the draft needs to say here. I think a reasonable set of statements > might be somthing along the lines of: > > - those providing the address space MUST provide INADDR service, either > themselves or by delegating zones to those using the space. In the case of the Registries, this means delegating the appropriate /16 or /24s to the organisation which has just received a CIDR allocation from the Registry; all RIRs have polices for this already in place. These policies generally allow the RIR to revoke a delegation in order to protect the RIR's infrastructure. Can this be expressly stated in the draft as well, ie: Regional Internet Registries and any Local Registries to whom they delegate SHOULD establish and convey a policy to those to whom they delegate blocks that require IN-ADDR mappings. These policies MAY be used by the Registry to revoke or reject a delegation that does not meet these stated policies. ( the rest of the original paragraph is then best stated in an additional paragraph. ) -- Bruce Campbell <bruce.campbell@apnic.net> +61-7-3367-0490 Systems Administrator Regional Internet Registry Asia Pacific Network Information Centre For the Asia Pacific Region Unix means never having to live hand-to-mouse.