[dns-wg] Solving lameness in the reverse zones

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Havard Eidnes wrote:
>> So, I propose we modify the current process to work something like this:
>>
>>      1. Tell users that their delegations are lame.
>>      2. Wait, then tell them again if not fixed.
>>      3. Wait, then PULL THE DELEGATION if not fixed.
> 
> One interpretation could be "pull the delegation to the lame name
> server, but leave the working ones in place".

Or, notify and stop.

Are lame delegations really such a problem that we need to take drastic
action?  How often would this be checked, and how much liability would
be here in modifying what is published?  I'd hate to see the papers when
a large content provider lost due to a temporary outage on one name
server...

- --Michael

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrg2ywACgkQ+NNi0s9NRJ2LdQCfacCLIVOMjBBMxw4anm0soiiq
TgUAnRGX99ldmU3MPMn1BdIA8h+ZcLpB
=GD/r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----