1. 11 y 12 Noviembre. México DF LACNIC III Inverse Resolution - proposal Frederico A C Neves

2. 11 y 12 Noviembre. México DF LACNIC III Inverse Resolution - proposal in-addr.arpa zone Used for inverse resolution –Sample reverse resolution 192.168.5.87 -> www.example.comwww.example.com 87.5.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR www.example.com. –Sample direct resolution www.example.comwww.example.com -> 192.168.5.87 www.example.com.www.example.com. IN A 192.168.5.87 Delegation schema of sub-zones limited by the 8 bits boundary format of representation

3. 11 y 12 Noviembre. México DF LACNIC III Inverse Resolution - proposal Delegation base on allocated prefix size /16 or shorter –Multiples delegations at the 16th bit boundary Sample 200.2/15 –2 zones 2.200.in-addr.arpa and 3.200.in-addr.arpa /17 to /24 –Multiples delegations at the 24th bit boundary Sample 200.35.0/20 –16 zones from 0.35.200.in-addr.arpa to 15.35.200.in-addr.arpa /25 or longer –Recommended the use of BCP20

4. 11 y 12 Noviembre. México DF LACNIC III Inverse Resolution - proposal Discussion / Consensus Reach ?

5. 11 y 12 Noviembre. México DF LACNIC III Inverse Resolution - proposal Lame delegation control Motivated by the side effects caused by some resolver implementations that impose higher load at upper levels of the delegation (notably /8 delegated servers for.in-addr.arpa). Already monitoring reverse lame delegations. Proposal should be addressed by a new working group at the mailing list. Volunteers ? Possible questions for the mailing list –What is the criteria to classify a multi zone delegation as lame ? –What should be the procedure when classified ?