Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Lame delegation in AFRINIC WHOIS database
nishal at controlfreak.co.za
Wed Oct 26 08:10:57 UTC 2016
On 26 Oct 2016, at 9:24, Amreesh Phokeer wrote:
> Dear Community,
> Questions to the community:
> 1. Should AFRINIC implement operational checks that are run
> periodically and members are informed about the status of their domain
yes. you don’t need policy to do this.
> After X reminders, if domain object still contain lame NS records,
> domain object are removed.
this bit is trickier :-)
i have some questions: do you have data on what percentage of domain
objects are entered by users, vs. hostmasters, or, are enforced through
a registration system (i confess i haven’t done this in a while!)
it’s rational to expect that not everyone has the same degree of
concern over working rdns (reverse dns). those that don’t want it,
can simply not register any domain objects (at their own risk), and,
life goes on…
so, my question above, is really asking if you have a(ny) registration
system that’s enforcing domain object creation; which subsequently
just simply doesn’t get actioned by the end user?
additionally, it wasn’t clear to me, from a quick read of the article:
* did you test v4 and v6 (transport, not zone type) separately
* did you test tcp and udp separately
* did you test (at least your failure set) from at least one other
> 2. Should the AFRINIC community enforce lame delegation removal
> through a policy.
i’d support this, and i’d be willing to help write text, and test
criteria, if needed.
More information about the RPD