mailing list archives
Re: AW: Odd policy question.
From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan () world std com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:38:12 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Jeffrey I. Schiller wrote:
Let me attempt to bring this back to the policy question.
Does someone have the *right* to put one of your IP addresses as an NS
record for their domain even if you do not agree?
Probably this is a multifaceted question :( So.. If I understand Drew's
original question he had a customer (valid paying customer) that signed up
for a new domain with $REGISTRAR12 called: "fooble.com". He put in his 2
ip addresses for the 2 servers sitting in Drew's cabinet as NS's (why
wouldn't he they were his to use then since he was paying for the service
there in Drew's world), he purchased the 10yr plan for the domain.
Later his company folded or he moved to another place with another name
effectively abandoning the names in place for some unrelated reason(s).
Drew is now allocating the 2 ips to a new customer who has setup NS's on
the same ips and is now getting 'lame delegation' action from some yokel
that walked away from his domain(s) :(
So, at the time of the domain registration the registerer had authority to
use Drew's ips, now he/she doesn't :( and isn't inn the mood to clean up
the 'mess' :(
Let's back up to the absolute defintion of the Internet that is still
valid to this day:
Multiple private networks exchanging traffic.
If I get a packet from someone and it crossed my border, IMHO, I
own that packet. I either deliver it or drop it. In this case, the
case where someone responds with a "The number you have reached.."
is a decision to deliver it. There isn't a requirement as to where
to deliver it, and if you agree with my interpretation of packet
ownership (I think lawyers do..), you'd say that this scenario is
reasonable. Note, IANAL, but we've been around enough to make a
rough non-legal opinion on this.
I think you may have some experience here that I don't since you
are at an SP and I'm not so I'd like to hear your thought.
Re: AW: Odd policy question. David W. Hankins (Jan 13)
Re: AW: Odd policy question. bmanning (Jan 13)
Re: AW: Odd policy question. Chris Owen (Jan 14)
Re: AW: Odd policy question. Simon Lyall (Jan 14)
Re: AW: Odd policy question. Florian Weimer (Jan 14)