[as112-ops] [gii-ops] Advice requested on a proposal to delegate .local to AS112

[Colin Petrie]

On 22/04/16 04:28, Joe Abley wrote:
>> >*) What is the criteria to declare the new AS112 worthy of having real 
>> >things delegated to it? I'm not aware of any existing delegations. 
>> >Please correct me if I'm wrong. 
> 
> The new AS112 presumably has the same number of things delegated to it,
> although lame delegation are possible (and no doubt detectable, if you
> receive the traffic).

I used the wrong word. DNAMEs, not delegations.

>> >(And as an AS112 w/RFC7535 operator, we don't get delegated DNS traffic 
>> >to the new prefixes, last time I looked (a few months ago)) 
> 
> I'm not sure what that means. If you announce 2620:4f:8000::/48 you
> don't see traffic at ::1, ::6 and ::42? Or something else?

DNS traffic to blackhole.as112.arpa (192.31.196.1 or 2001:4:112::1, so
DNAME AS112) was basically non-existant (at our node).

Checking again this morning, it is still basically true (although there
are now some very occasional sporadic queries)


P.S. I fully support using the new DNAME service (and our node is ready
for it), but I'm just wondering if it is deployed well enough to throw
.local at it.

Cheers,
Colin


-- 
Colin Petrie
Systems Engineer
RIPE NCC