Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] New Proposal: Lame delegations in AFRINIC reverse DNS

David Hilario d.hilario at
Fri Apr 14 10:51:28 UTC 2017

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for the reply.

I do support the end goal of this policy proposal, I just want more

On Apr 13, 2017 11:50 PM, "Daniel Shaw" <daniel at> wrote:

> On 13 Apr 2017, at 23:18, David Hilario <d.hilario at>
> As long as it is guaranteed to be 100% automated, so that once
> implemented it does not take any operational manpower from AFRINIC
> staff in tracking, notifying and updating, I am in support.

Hi David,

Thanks. As this question speaks to the implementation by staff, it would be
challenging for the authors to be able to guarantee as part of the policy.
However, the authors’ expectation when writing this proposal was that
indeed this would be automated.

The benefit for the community must not impact the already strained
resources of AFRINIC staff, comments from AFRINIC ltd on how they would
expect to handle such a mandate would indeed be appreciated.

Such a policy could require either extra staff, or add further load on
current staff, the net benefit of hunting down bad RDNS would be outweigh
by either prospects.

A simple and extreme example to showcase my reluctance of providing support
without some implementation grantees.
Let's say we have a policy proposal that demands that AFRINIC ltd verifies
all postal address provided in the AFRINIC Database, with no clear
implementation guidelines and the policy gets approved.

AFRINIC decides that the best way to do this is to physically go to each
location, therefore needs to hire 100 persons, and triple the membership
fees of the LIRs.

This is why a somewhat guarantee of automation and limitation in the
implementation would be needed for me to support the policy without any

> How would the historical information be provided?
> Would making deleted domain object visible through the whois query
> "--show-version " be an option?

The authors also leave this to the implementing staff to decide. However we
do believe the policy should have *some* way to get the history, be that
via WHOIS port 43, My.AFRINIC or some other interface entirely. Or some

A bit more guidelines would be good here as well.
This leaves AFRINIC staff open to criticism in case people do not like the
final implementation.

I anyway do not even really see a need for that info to be provided.
If name servers are removed but the domain object is still present,
historical info is available via whois queries as long as the object is not
deleted from the Database.

If the full object is removed, the maintainer etc, should had received a
notification from the automated system with a copy of the object from the
hopefully automated notification system prior to the deletion.
And should again receive some form of notification from the database with a
copy of the object once it is deleted.

You can skip that part of the policy proposal as the vast majority of the
affected users would have no need for it anyways and would had received the
information in one form or another during the process.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list