[dns-operations] Delegation checking

[Mark Andrews]

> * Jo Rhett:
> 
> >  From the rest of your post, I think you do.  Let me rephrase: we  =
> 
> > should make the registrant suffer by breaking their web and email  =
> 
> > rather than making us suffer.

	Us == all users of the DNS that happen to lookup the name.

	Remember there are people who just pick domain names when
	sending email and don't care about whether there are working
	DNS servers for that domain.
 
> Who is "us"?  Registrars?  Registries?
> 
> For completely lame delegations that aren't just temporary, it's
> probably a good idea to pull the NS records from the parent zone (with
> proper safeguards, of course).  But in this case, I fail to see how
> anyone suffers, how there's an improvement, and how this could prompt
> any action from the registrant.
> 
> If just one of the listed servers is lame, I don't think you can
> justify a suspension of that delegation.  It doesn't make much sense
> from a technical perspective.  It's also quite hard to prove that a
> delegation is really lame for large parts of the net.
>
> -- =
> 
> Florian Weimer                <fweimer at bfk.de>
> BFK edv-consulting GmbH       http://www.bfk.de/
> Kriegsstra=DFe 100              tel: +49-721-96201-1
> D-76133 Karlsruhe             fax: +49-721-96201-99
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.oarci.net
> http://lists.oarci.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org