[dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] DNS Related Policy and Procedure Proposals
Matus UHLAR - fantomas uhlar at fantomas.sk
Thu Jan 22 12:46:07 CET 2004
Hello, On 22.01 02:47, Sascha Lenz wrote: > [I didn't remove ncc-services-wg and db-wg lists since it's also a > policy and db-issue] > > Olaf Kolkman wrote: > > [...] > >The reverse delegation policy has been revised, relaxing the terms > >under which reverse delegation will be serviced and providing the > >framework to implement the authorisation mechanism described > >above. > > > >The draft "Policy for Reverse Address Delegation of IPv4 and IPv6 > >Address Space in the RIPE NCC Service Region" can be found at: > > > >http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/reverse-draft-200401.html > > > >We would like to invite your comments on this. Please discuss these > >proposals on the DNS Working Group mailing list. > [...] > > AFAIR there was no objection to this proposal as long as it comes to > relaxing the policy itself. > I think we could implement the new draft ASAP. I agree, that should run already ;-) > The best part in my eyes is, that with the new policy and the new > authorisation system (mnt-domains ect.), every address space holder can > again request/update their rDNS delegations on their own (given the > correct db authorisation) - as long as they know what they do. > (At least I think that's intentionally, since all the parts relating to > only LIRs can hand in requests have been removed :-) ) I only have one question - do I need to use mntner object for reverse delegation? If so, couldn't that be just left on persons/roles? So we (DNS team) wouldn't need two objects to delegate DNS for our address space. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory.
[ dns-wg Archives ]