[dns-wg] lameness and unreachability

On the APNIC mailing list (sig-dns) a discussion has been begun to 
try and define the problem needing to be solved (assuming there is 
one).  I'm not sure that the discussion should be mirrored here, but 
I wanted to call attention to those interested.

List info -
    List-Id: APNIC SIG on DNS issues <sig-dns.lists.apnic.net>
    List-Archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-dns/>

Before spouting too much on my own here, what is the topic that needs 
to be discussed(on this mailing list)?

    ...what RIPE defines (or should define) as a problem delegation?
    ...a means to measure the health of the DNS delegations?
    ...how ccTLDs go about testing delegations?
    ...what responsibility a registry has in publicizing their test criteria?

I know that some of the above are topics that are not what is 
desired, but I'm just trying to throw out some suggestions.  The 
reason I am doing this is that there has been a recent spurt in DNS 
health mailing lists and it would be good if we could consolidate 
discussions so as not to cross-post, repost, etc.  Also, the topics 
above have either recently appeared or were mentioned at the recent 
meeting.

BTW - I am not saying that RIPE has a lame delegation problem.  Stats 
I've seen are that "bad delegations" are much more rare in the RIPE 
region than in the ARIN region.  There are possibly clear reasons for 
this - in the ARIN region, delegations are "cut" in the DNS without 
any pre-testing of servers.  Also, ARIN has a lot of delegations that 
predate ARIN's establishment.

Also - I'm shying away from using "lame delegations" based on how it 
is defined in the RFCs.  The suggested name I threw onto the APNIC 
list is "unreachable zones."
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                            +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer

Your office is *not* a reality-based sit-com TV show.