--On Monday, 21 January, 2008 17:55 +0100 Bernie Hoeneisen <bhoeneis@switch.ch> wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Jim Reid wrote:
Same as it's always been Bernie. The Tier 1 registry for +39 should beef up its DNS infrastructure, for example by buying DNS service from a reliable hosting provider.
Would Ripe have the possibility to (temporarly) remove the delegation, if such situations occur? Unfortunately, it happens quite often with Italy....:-(
It is particularly disappointing that the 9.3.e164.arpa zone seems to delegated to just two name servers that live on the same subnet. RFC2182 advised against this 11 years ago.
Hi. Under principles that go back much longer than even RFC 2182 (as does the principle of separated name servers -- 2182 just reaffirmed an old principle and stated it more clearly), a registry should be able to remove a zone if it is consistently poorly administered. Given the circumstances of e164.arpa, I think actually doing that would require a discussion between RIPE NCC and the IAB. But I see no reason why it should not be possible to reach consensus on a mechanism for notifying a Tier 1 registry that, if they do not manage to establish servers that do not fate-share, the zone delegation will be removed until they develop and implement a plan. john