New draft charter for the RIPE DNS WG

Brad Knowles wrote:

> 	Well, at least for those zones that are delegated from the RIPE 
> NCC, warnings could be sent to the delegees, and if those warnings 
> are not acted on and the problem solved (within a specified period of 
> time), then the delegation could be removed -- no information is 
> better than bad information.

the zones delegated by the RIPE NCC almost all are zones within the IN-ADDR.ARPA
tree. My personal opinion is that there's not much educational gain by
revoking such delegations. Let's take this as a suggestion that the WG could
discuss operational standards for this kind of zones and encourage
monitoring (and notifying).

> well as the owners of the problem servers, and requests could be made 
> to the root server operators to de-list the problematical servers, or 
> to otherwise request that they enforce the policies.

Brad, please. The root server operators currently are not in charge of
``delisting the problematical servers''. It's even hard enough to have
a TLD delegation changed if you are the officially registered TLD contact
(which is, of course, not a fault of the root NS operators).

> 	If there aren't any complaint procedures to request this kind of 
> action, and/or policies that the TLD zone administrators and TLD 
> server operators are required to follow, then I would suggest that we 
> could help create them and then work to get them implemented.

-Peter