|
|
 |
Re: [address-policy-wg] Assignments for Critical Infrastruction
-
To: "Ondřej Surý" <ondrej.sury@localhost
-
From: "B C" brettlists@localhost
-
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:59:11 +0000
-
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=e8QgDzRh4c6YT90wWRERMwXdMgxnqpsI0Hw9HQmw9gY=; b=OxWqlBQ+KXnf2L80AGzc2qgAgKMGV7m8UzwwLarwsGOBhOSbErBFMqC75RgOLM2vfU 4Z1Zr/w/UF3S09S7lHFEv+79c5ZZgXSMiZ2s22j9RMN4m0gdJKhVNxkjbLipb3MXxXkh kUdzML6a0/htrG8nEGUc3CyNQnXxcrPTe2jEI=
-
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=Rg+dVbucxHUMYUfRRL9mAjDK5ssMPDFH803TNiQAZoDUgGx+weOYjA2bQoFKX4qiry wEc8rI29Anu9CW5IA5ZZ+8xEtDxtEvbvGw4h81GrHAhDhJK+tp+7wLLogWRi9h0QDvZj ZfurU4qIrUm/AiqT7faXA9OZOD+MzPcMo7YfM=
Ondrej,
in the light of the comments on my proposal for ENUM anycast assignments discussed in Dubai, I was planning to write a revised policy proposal to go through PDP, I will be taking action on this as soon as the minutes/webcast from Dubai are available. I think it's safe to say we are working towards the same/similar goal and I think it's important that we don't both do the same work. I will have a first draft of my proposal here in the next couple of weeks.
Regards
Brett Carr
Nominet UK
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Ondřej Surý <> wrote:
Hello everybody,
I would like to post unformal proposal before writing
official policy modification proposal (and/or having
discussion tomorrow on Open Hour).
We would like to see policy for IPv4 and IPv6 modified
to allow /24 *minimum* for IPv4 and /48 *minimum* to
gTLD/ccTLD.
First reason behind this is that one PI is not really
enough and it's blocking us to deploy more DNS servers
and make our TLD service more reliable.
Second reason is that if we deploy more Anycasted DNS
servers we could keep (or drop down) number of NS records
for TLD, so we could manage to keep DNS reply size low
even with DNSSEC.
And last, but not least, it would be good to keep this
synchronized with other regions (see [1],[2]). Note:
we may also extend the list of requestors to:
Root DNS, ccTLD, gTLD, IANA, RIRs.
Which I think is reasonable list.
1. http://www.nro.net/documents/comp-pol.html#2-4-2
2. http://www.nro.net/documents/comp-pol.html#3-4-1
If there is at least some consensus, I am willing to
write official policy change proposal.
Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý
technický ředitel/Chief Technical Officer
-----------------------------------------
CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o. -- .cz domain registry
Americká 23,120 00 Praha 2,Czech Republic
mailto: http://nic.cz/
tel:+420.222745110
mob:+420.739013699 fax:+420.222745112
-----------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
