nanog mailing list archives
Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem
From: Michael Dillon <michael () memra com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 14:17:01 -0800 (PST)
On Tue, 8 Dec 1998 prue () ISI EDU wrote:
...Presumably in this case, you are responsible for that nameserver and therefore the /32 should be SWIP'd to you.
so well, that Paul decides to sell this as a service to many small/medium size ISP's, running it on a single server. Now one /32 is the name server for multiple networks. So the registration system must be able to deal with that. This is not an unreasonable scenario.
In this case Paul would not SWIP the /32 at all since he maintains the responsibility for the server. Presumably then he would handle the registration of the nameserver address with ARIN and the original problem would not occur since the registration application is coming from the entity with administrative control over the IP address in question. -- Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael () memra com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com
Current thread:
- ARIN co-located nameserver problem Dean Anderson (Dec 08)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Michael Dillon (Dec 08)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Wayne (Dec 09)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Randy Bush (Dec 09)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Karl Denninger (Dec 09)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Wayne (Dec 09)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Michael Dillon (Dec 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem prue (Dec 08)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Michael Dillon (Dec 08)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Dean Anderson (Dec 08)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Kim Hubbard (Dec 09)
- Re: ARIN co-located nameserver problem Dean Anderson (Dec 09)