Moin!
On 30 Jun 2015, at 14:30, Romeo Zwart wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> The RIPE NCC holds a number of domains besides ripe.net.
>
> Some of these domains were only registered as a "protection"
> mechanism, which was considered good practice at the time.
Is this considered bad practice now? Was
Moin!
On 30 Jun 2015, at 16:41, Jim Reid wrote:
So we are talking about 12 domains. What is the hassle of keeping
them?
Adding cruft for cruft's sake creates needless hassles and overhead.
We should all be wary about asking the NCC to make open-ended
commitments and at the very least review
Moin!
On 28 Jun 2016, at 12:26, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Ramtin Kiaei shows how to mitigate DNS attacks by implementing a
stateless firewall filter at the aggregation or edge router.
Please find his article on RIPE Labs:
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/ramtin_kiaei/securing-networ
Moin!
On 29 Jun 2016, at 8:55, Henrik Lund Kramshøj wrote:
and when being attacked the harm is already done, service will be
interrupted if we do nothing …
There is a difference on doing something as a response to attacks or
having something hanging there that might treat you bad down the road.
Moin!
On 1 Sep 2016, at 14:57, Peter Koch wrote:
> for the vacant position as a DNS WG co-chair I would like to nominate
> Ralf Weber <https://de.linkedin.com/in/fl1ger>.
>
> Ralf has been an active and thoughtful member of the DNS community
> within RIPE and beyond for a
Moin!
On 1 Sep 2017, at 8:52, Joao Damas wrote:
Dear all,
With this email I would like to put my name forward as a candidate for
the DNS WG cochair role as announced yesterday by the current
co-chairs.
I have been involved in the DNS WG at RIPE for a long time,
contributing when and where
tion.
And all modern DNS software is either authoritative or recursive and
there is a good reason for that. Unless you believe people dealing
with this for decades are wrong.
So long
-Ralf
—--
Ralf Weber
had to answer quite a few customer questions
yesterday, so here we are. Akamai/Nominum Cacheserve and Akamai/Xerocole
AnswerX are not affected by this. We had limits in the software for this
in the Cacheserve case from day one. Would appreciate if you could
correct that in the article.
So long
-Ralf
—-
-Ralf
——-
Ralf Weber
g.
Interesting wasn’t aware of this angle to it, but IANAL.
So long
-Ralf
---
Ralf Weber
ow use a in country provider
instead of the default US based provider. As said the bad idea was setting a
default. That at least is a better default for Canadians.
So long
-Ralf
——-
Ralf Weber
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your
subscription o
Moin!
On 29 Nov 2021, at 12:59, Anand Buddhdev wrote:
> We propose to lower, in the first quarter of 2022, the TTL on NS records to
> 86400 and on DS records to 3600.
I very much support that and would go even lower for for NS records. Maybe
consider 21600 there.
So long
-Ralf
——-
Ralf
selection of Willem as the next RIPE DNS working group co-chair
and wish him a successful tenure.
So long
-Ralf
——-
Ralf Weber
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your
subscription options, please visit:
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-wg
vixie-dnsop-dns-rpz](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vixie-dnsop-dns-rpz/00/).
RPZ is just one mechanism to do this. It has nothing to do with the
actual content. Shouldn’t we generalise that requirement and just
talk about blocklists and not the mechanism?
Overall the document is an exte
14 matches
Mail list logo
