[as112-ops] AS112 nameservers as NS for parked domains

[William F. Maton Sotomayor]

On Tue, 2 Dec 2014, Aleksi Suhonen wrote:

> Hi,
>
> William wrote:
>>> I recall seeing a posting either here in this list or in another
>>> list about someone registering or parking a domain by using the
>>> AS112 anycast addresses as their nameservers.
>>> 
>>> Can anyone think of reasons why this is or isn't a good idea both
>>> from the perspective of the domain name operator and the AS112
>>> operator?
>
> I don't think it really matters. The whole purpose of AS112 is to be the sink 
> for unwanted DNS traffic. It shouldn't matter *why* said DNS traffic is 
> unwanted.

OK cool thanks for that.  I was thinking of adding some kind of statement 
to rfc6304bis to the effect that it's rude not to tell people (especially 
if it's to off load a DDOS attack), but with many AS112 nodes, the 
mitigation might still be effective.

> That being said, we run an AS112 node at an IXP, where we have virtually 
> unlimited bandwidth for it. I'm sure someone who's announcing AS112 to their 
> paid transits might see the issue differently.
>
> I think one goal should be to get AS112 nodes peered with tier1 operators 
> too, thus abolishing the need for transit... ;-)
>
>
> Warren Kumari wrote:
>> "Can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking
>> in, changing their NS to be AS112 and walking out. And friends they
>> may thinks it's a movement."
>
>> P.S: *This* is why I shouldn't send mail while listening to music...
>
> I wish we could hear the same noises as you do. :)
>
> --
> 	+358 44 9756548 / http://www.trex.fi/
> 	Aleksi Suhonen / TREX Regional Exchanges Oy
>
> 	You say "potato", I say "closest-exit."
> _______________________________________________
> as112-ops mailing list
> as112-ops at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/as112-ops
>

wfms