Re: [dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors

Anand, all, On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 03:54:54PM +0100, Anand Buddhdev wrote: > 151.76.62.in-addr.arpa > ripe.int > ripen.cc > On Tuesday, 11 November 2014, we rolled our DNSSEC Key Signing Keys > and added the new trust anchors for these three zones to the ISC > DLV TAR. Because we believe manual

[dns-wg] {Use of} the INT TLD {by the NCC and others} [Re: RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:28:32AM -1000, David Conrad wrote: > On Nov 13, 2014, at 8:05 AM, Doug Barton wrote: > > The NCC should simply release ripe.int, as the historical reasons for > > it no longer apply. (FWIW, same goes for apnic.int. None of the other > > RIRs have similar domains.) > >

Re: [dns-wg] {Use of} the INT TLD {by the NCC and others} [Re: RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors]

Hi David, On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:21:00AM -1000, David Conrad wrote: > Or, given the IANA Functions transition, the exact right point in time if > people want to avoid a pointless political food fight. well, we hopefully agree that 'unasking' the questions isn't the right thing to do. Wheth

Re: [dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:16:19AM +, Niall O'Reilly wrote: > I'm reading that as a call from one of the co-chairs for (more) > voices from the WG, so here's mine. > > Let's have RIPE.INT removed. this isn't f*cebook. As a co-chair of this wg I doubt it is reasonable for the WG to micr

Re: [dns-wg] reminder about the WG Chair appointment process

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:09:25PM +, Jim Reid wrote: > [2] A co-chair will serve a term of N years, where N is the number > of co-chairs. Terms will be staggered so that one term expires every > year. A co-chair cannot serve more than 2 consecutive terms. as was mentioned during the session,

Re: [dns-wg] yet another heave on the WG Chair selection procedure

Jim, all, On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 05:33:48PM +, Jim Reid wrote: > One sticking point appears to be the "A co-chair cannot serve more than 2 > consecutive terms." provision in [2]. Someone commented at the mike at RIPE69 > that this was a good thing. One of your co-chairs says the opposite.

[dns-wg] Call for input for the RIPE 70 DNS WG meeting

Dear WG, the meeting plan for RIPE 70 in Amsterdam shows a 90 minute slot on Thursday (14 May) for the DNS WG. This is the usual call for input, presentations, suggestions for discussions. Please let me or us (== ) know what you'd like to present,

[dns-wg] Draft Agenda for DNS WG meeting at RIPE 70, Amsterdam

Dear DNS WG, the next RIPE meeting, RIPE 70 in Amsterdam, is eight weeks away. The DNS WG has a single slot on Thursday morning this time. Please find below the first draft agenda for our meeting. We are pretty much filling our assigned time already, but please do not hesitate to comment here or

Re: [dns-wg] Draft Agenda for DNS WG meeting at RIPE 70, Amsterdam

Dear DNS WG, > We are pretty much filling our assigned time already, but please do not > hesitate to comment here or directly to your co-chairs at > . there is good news that is not yet reflected by the agenda at , but already visible at <

[dns-wg] final DNS WG agenda for Wed & Thu

Dear WG, after some careful shifting and resizing, here's now the final agenda for our two DNS WG sessions on Wednesday and Thursday: - RIPE 70 DNS WG Wed 13 May 2015 09:00 - 10:30 ---

Re: [dns-wg] RIPE NCC domain registrations

Hi, On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 02:30:39PM +0200, Romeo Zwart wrote: > Some of these domains were only registered as a "protection" > mechanism, which was considered good practice at the time. and probably still is? There's probably no actual value in keeping them for a use, but once they are rel

Re: [dns-wg] Last Call for presentations and Draft programme for RIPE 71

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 10:21:06PM +0200, Benno Overeinder wrote: > https://ripe71.ripe.net/programme/ > > There are still few slots remaining for a final RIPE 71 programme and > RIPE Programme Committee will accept new proposals until 11 October 2015. just to avoid any confusion: this is only r

Re: [dns-wg] Co-chair appointment process: 2015 call for volunteers/nominees

Dear WG, On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 01:42:25PM +0100, Jim Reid wrote: > The barriers for entry are zero. Anyone can volunteer simply by posting to > the list. You can nominate anyone, including yourself. It might be helpful > for candidates to give the WG an explanation of why they have been nomin

Re: [dns-wg] Yeti DNS and the RIPE NCC

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 02:41:45PM +0200, Shane Kerr wrote: > the RIPE NCC would be awesome in this capacity, given their unique role > in the DNS world (they are the only RIR who is also a root operator, > plus they do a lot of work supporting various ccTLD). Personally I indeed the NCC's partic

Re: [dns-wg] Yeti DNS and the RIPE NCC

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 11:50:15AM +0200, João Damas wrote: > Actually Jim, first comes the poll of the community to see if this fits, > later comes what you suggest, if the community decides to ask the RIPE NCC to > look into it, or have we become the Ministry of IP? this member of the communit

[dns-wg] nomination for DNS WG co-chair

Dear DNS WG, for the vacant position as a DNS WG co-chair I would like to nominate Ralf Weber . Ralf has been an active and thoughtful member of the DNS community within RIPE and beyond for a longer while. He is familiar with various roles in the DNS, be that

Re: [dns-wg] Deletion of ns-v6.ripe.net

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:33:16PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: > Thus: have ns-v6.ripe.net point to a *new* server, which will then > be able to notice "oh, people have something in their configuration, > somewhere, which references ns-v6.ripe.net". will this shed only collect the bikes or also re

Re: [dns-wg] SLD .gov.* within european countries

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:59:08PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > bund.de is used by the German federal government. I'm not aware of > any non-federal users. this is true, but the name is in no way special. It is just a registration like any other, DE does not have any 'structure' at the second

Re: [dns-wg] SLD .gov.* within european countries

Antonio, all, On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 04:03:23PM +0200, Antonio Prado wrote: > 'the second level domain (SLD) ".gov", when used, identifies only the > administrations within the EU and the USA (as the first level) central > government, with the exception of the United Kingdom, and not without > d

Re: [dns-wg] Volunteer list for RIPE DNS working group chair

Dave, all, On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:47:26PM -0400, Dave Knight wrote: > Nov 2015, RIPE 71 Peter Koch was succeeded by Dave Knight for a 3 year term > Oct 2016, RIPE 73 Jim Reid was succeeded by Shane Kerr for a 3 year term > Oct 2017, RIPE 75 Jaap Akkerhuis was succeeded by Joao Da

Re: [dns-wg] Lower TTLs for NS and DS records in reverse DNS delegations

On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 01:11:17PM +0100, Jeroen Massar via dns-wg wrote: > > Same. I support this, and I also support lowering NS even further, even > > to 3600. > > Another Aye from me on DS & NS to TTL 3600. I'm slightly reminded of the solar activity cycle by another instance of a race to lo