From dougb at dougbarton.us Wed Nov 1 01:27:38 2006 From: dougb at dougbarton.us (Doug Barton) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 16:27:38 -0800 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <4547E9FA.9060500@dougbarton.us> M?ns Nilsson wrote: > > --On tisdag, tisdag 31 okt 2006 11.45.34 -0800 Doug Barton > wrote: > >> some slack until the ME and SE domains are up and running, but then >> that one needs to go too. > > Methinks SE is up and running and has been so for some time. I think Bj??rn > got the delegation from Jon Postel 1984, and we've been trying to not fall > of the Internet since then. I believe you're confusing Konungariket Sverige > (SE) with Republika Srbija (RS), in some form. I believe you're right. :) Thanks for pointing this out. -- If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough From jefsey at jefsey.com Wed Nov 1 01:15:41 2006 From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey_Morfin) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 01:15:41 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <20061101011927.7266824201@postman.ripe.net> Dear Doug, Experience shown (with EU representatives being present on the list) that "EU" was not considered by the ietf-languages at alvestrand.no supposed reviewer of the IANA Language Subtags and Extension Registries as part of ISO 3166 codes and therefore the leading economic language "en-EU" could not be documented along with the IANA registry. The implications of your kind of points IANA/ISO respective weight and importance and the resulting implications on the DNS root(s) and IDNs are key questions right now in Athens. I understand that you are here. May I suggest we try to spot one another and quickly discuss this. jfc At 20:45 31/10/2006, Doug Barton wrote: >Randy Bush wrote: > >> Now I know that you THINK you want it, because you want to make a case > >> for preserving YOUR ccTLD. But you really don't want to open that can > >> of worms. > > > > your mail system seems broken. it has regurgitated an old mail. one > > pre the issuance of EU > >As Kim pointed out, EU is "in the list" as exceptionally reserved, >just like UK and AC. If you'd like to have a discussion about not >including any exceptionally reserved names in the root, the ccNSO >and/or the ccNSO-IANA working group are probably the best forums for >that. If you choose to have that discussion, it's probably worth >noting that it is not uncommon for names to move from "exceptionally >reserved" status to "officially assigned" status, as has happened over >the last two years for GG, IM, and JE. Sure it would be nice if the >world was simple, but it's not. > >On the other hand, SU has specifically been deleted by ISO, hence the >ccTLD needs to be deleted as well (just like ZR was back in the day). >For that matter, TP is way overdue for being deleted, as the TL domain >has been up and running for a long time now. I think we can cut YU >some slack until the ME and SE domains are up and running, but then >that one needs to go too. > >My point is, we actually do have a policy here, and the SU operators >are running their operation with deliberate disregard for it. If you >don't like the policy, there are places to debate it, however since >this isn't one of them, I think I'll leave it at that. > >Doug > >-- > If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robert+ripelists at martin-legene.dk Wed Nov 1 05:27:24 2006 From: robert+ripelists at martin-legene.dk (Robert =?iso-8859-1?Q?Martin-Leg=E8ne?=) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 05:27:24 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <20061101042724.GA13590@kb.pinguino.dk> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 11:45:34AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > On the other hand, SU has specifically been deleted by ISO, hence the > ccTLD needs to be deleted as well (just like ZR was back in the day). > For that matter, TP is way overdue for being deleted, as the TL domain > has been up and running for a long time now. I think we can cut YU > some slack until the ME and SE domains are up and running, but then > that one needs to go too. Hello Doug. IIRC the initial discussion came from some not seing this as something which "needs to be done" and from Crain saying there was no policy. Indeed your own posts seems to indicate this lack of policy too. But just for clarification, I wonder if you would like to say if the wording above stems from a policy somewhere or from your own conviction? Kind regards, Robert Martin-Leg?ne From hank at efes.iucc.ac.il Wed Nov 1 06:44:43 2006 From: hank at efes.iucc.ac.il (Hank Nussbacher) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:44:43 +0200 (IST) Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, M??ns Nilsson wrote: > Methinks SE is up and running and has been so for some time. I think Bj??rn > got the delegation from Jon Postel 1984, and we've been trying to not fall > of the Internet since then. I believe you're confusing Konungariket Sverige > (SE) with Republika Srbija (RS), in some form. Close but no cigar. :-) SE was only created by Jon in Sept 1986: http://www.interall.co.il/cctld.html IANA confirms: http://www.iana.org/root-whois/se.htm Regards, Hank From president at ukraine.su Wed Nov 1 10:13:38 2006 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:13:38 +0300 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <45486542.8020802@ukraine.su> Doug Barton wrote: > My point is, we actually do have a policy here, and the SU operators > are running their operation with deliberate disregard for it. If you > don't like the policy, there are places to debate it, however since > this isn't one of them, I think I'll leave it at that. You also can take a look at official SU statistics, for example, previous month: http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/trend-20061031.shtml http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/summ_trend-20061031.shtml This domain grows even it have huge price ( http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From president at ukraine.su Wed Nov 1 10:18:34 2006 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:18:34 +0300 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <4548666A.8050902@ukraine.su> Doug Barton wrote: > Now I know that you THINK you want it, because you want to make a case > for preserving YOUR ccTLD. But you really don't want to open that can > of worms. People usually keep silence unless something cares them personally ;) And of course, it is mine only for 0.0125%, as you can see in statistic. -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From dougb at dougbarton.us Wed Nov 1 19:34:37 2006 From: dougb at dougbarton.us (Doug Barton) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 10:34:37 -0800 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <20061101042724.GA13590@kb.pinguino.dk> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> <20061101042724.GA13590@kb.pinguino.dk> Message-ID: <4548E8BD.8030408@dougbarton.us> Robert Martin-Leg?ne wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 11:45:34AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: >> On the other hand, SU has specifically been deleted by ISO, hence the >> ccTLD needs to be deleted as well (just like ZR was back in the day). >> For that matter, TP is way overdue for being deleted, as the TL domain >> has been up and running for a long time now. I think we can cut YU >> some slack until the ME and RS domains are up and running, but then >> that one needs to go too. > > Hello Doug. > > IIRC the initial discussion came from some not seing this as something > which "needs to be done" Disappointing on its face to start with. > and from Crain saying there was no policy. I am not in a position to comment on what John may or may not have said, how it may or may not have been interpreted, or the environment John was operating in during the early days of ICANN. > Indeed your own posts seems to indicate this lack of policy too. I'm honestly confused as to how you could come to that conclusion, but it's not worth debating. I'll do my best to make my thoughts clear below. > But > just for clarification, I wonder if you would like to say if the wording > above stems from a policy somewhere or from your own conviction? Let's start with RFC 1591 ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc1591.txt (which any of you who are involved with the administration of a TLD should probably go back and read periodically), especially Section 4.2: 2) Country Codes The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what is not a country. The selection of the ISO 3166 list as a basis for country code top-level domain names was made with the knowledge that ISO has a procedure for determining which entities should be and should not be on that list. Then in May of 1999, ICANN reaffirmed those principles in ICP-1. http://www.icann.org/icp/icp-1.htm There is a policy, and there is precedent (for names being removed from the root after the country code is deleted from the ISO list). What there is not is a clearly defined procedure on how and when it should be done. In the past that has been left up to the good will of the ccTLD operators. Unfortunately, it seems that in at least some cases that good will can no longer be relied on. Max Tulyev wrote: > You also can take a look at official SU statistics, for example, > previous month: > > http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/trend-20061031.shtml > http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/summ_trend-20061031.shtml > > This domain grows even it have huge price ( > http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. A) Wanting something is not the same as needing it. B) My feeling is that what you're saying here (substantial registration growth in spite of the high price) speaks more to the motivations of the SU operators for maintaining their domain than it does for the necessity of keeping it in the root. Doug -- If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough From dougb at dougbarton.us Wed Nov 1 19:36:59 2006 From: dougb at dougbarton.us (Doug Barton) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 10:36:59 -0800 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <4548E94B.8090908@dougbarton.us> Jefsey_Morfin wrote: > IDNs are key questions right now in Athens. I understand that you are here. I would be fascinated to learn how you came to that conclusion. :) Doug -- If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough From david.conrad at icann.org Wed Nov 1 19:49:44 2006 From: david.conrad at icann.org (David Conrad) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 10:49:44 -0800 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <45486542.8020802@ukraine.su> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> <45486542.8020802@ukraine.su> Message-ID: Max, If you believe IANA should depart from historical and existing policies with regards to delegations and removals of two-letter top- level domains, I would suggest you initiate an ICANN policy development process within the appropriate supporting organization (s). Until that time, IANA is pretty much constrained to follow existing policies despite the fact that some people might be making money registering names for a country that no longer exists. Rgds, -drc On Nov 1, 2006, at 1:13 AM, Max Tulyev wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: > >> My point is, we actually do have a policy here, and the SU operators >> are running their operation with deliberate disregard for it. If you >> don't like the policy, there are places to debate it, however since >> this isn't one of them, I think I'll leave it at that. > > You also can take a look at official SU statistics, for example, > previous month: > > http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/trend-20061031.shtml > http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/summ_trend-20061031.shtml > > This domain grows even it have huge price ( > http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. > > -- > WBR, > Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) > From pk at DENIC.DE Wed Nov 1 20:12:31 2006 From: pk at DENIC.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 20:12:31 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] Last Call: DNS WG meeting minutes for RIPE 53 Message-ID: <20061101191231.GM539@unknown.office.denic.de> Dear WG, there were minor remarks to the draft meeting minutes which were addressed in the second draft posted on October, 25th in and made available under . This is the real Last Call for comments on the minutes, to end in two weeks, Wed 2006-11-15 23:59 UTC. Thanks, Peter From president at ukraine.su Thu Nov 2 09:34:27 2006 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:34:27 +0300 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4548E8BD.8030408@dougbarton.us> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> <20061101042724.GA13590@kb.pinguino.dk> <4548E8BD.8030408@dougbarton.us> Message-ID: <4549AD93.2000700@ukraine.su> Doug Barton wrote: >> This domain grows even it have huge price ( >> http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. > > A) Wanting something is not the same as needing it. The magic is who decides what I need and what I don't need. > B) My feeling is that what you're saying here (substantial > registration growth in spite of the high price) speaks more to the > motivations of the SU operators for maintaining their domain than it > does for the necessity of keeping it in the root. Nobody push people to buy .SU domains. Only issue they do it - they need it. Am I wrong? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From heldal at eml.cc Thu Nov 2 11:30:47 2006 From: heldal at eml.cc (Per Heldal) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:30:47 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4549AD93.2000700@ukraine.su> References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> <20061101042724.GA13590@kb.pinguino.dk> <4548E8BD.8030408@dougbarton.us> <4549AD93.2000700@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <1162463447.17115.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 11:34 +0300, Max Tulyev wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: > >> This domain grows even it have huge price ( > >> http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. > > > > A) Wanting something is not the same as needing it. > > The magic is who decides what I need and what I don't need. That you _prefer_ .su doesn't mean that the TLDs it's been split into can't meet your _needs_. preferences != needs > > > B) My feeling is that what you're saying here (substantial > > registration growth in spite of the high price) speaks more to the > > motivations of the SU operators for maintaining their domain than it > > does for the necessity of keeping it in the root. > > Nobody push people to buy .SU domains. Only issue they do it - they need > it. Am I wrong? > Are anybody pushing people to avoid .su? I.e. how much effort are the .su-maintainers putting into convincing people to use the individual ccTLDs instead? ;-) -- Per Heldal - http://heldal.eml.cc/ From president at ukraine.su Thu Nov 2 11:50:10 2006 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 13:50:10 +0300 Subject: >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> Hi Dmitry! Yeah, I see the big difference and using double-standards about two domains SU/EU are both not in ISO list :( But hope we can help to move it right way ;) Dmitriy V Menzulskiy wrote: > > Hi Max ! Hi everybody ! > > Now I understand: people who want to destroy Soviet Union - they still > want to destroy it comletely :-((( > > Maybe, it's time to start CIS TLD ? > > WBR, > > Dmitry Menzulskiy > > ----- ?????????: Dmitriy V Menzulskiy/BeeLine ????: 02.11.2006 13:39 ----- > > dns-wg-admin at ripe.net ???????? 02.11.2006 13:30:47: > >> On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 11:34 +0300, Max Tulyev wrote: >> > Doug Barton wrote: >> > >> This domain grows even it have huge price ( >> > >> http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. >> > > >> > > A) Wanting something is not the same as needing it. >> > >> > The magic is who decides what I need and what I don't need. >> >> That you _prefer_ .su doesn't mean that the TLDs it's been split into >> can't meet your _needs_. >> >> preferences != needs >> >> > >> > > B) My feeling is that what you're saying here (substantial >> > > registration growth in spite of the high price) speaks more to the >> > > motivations of the SU operators for maintaining their domain than it >> > > does for the necessity of keeping it in the root. >> > >> > Nobody push people to buy .SU domains. Only issue they do it - they need >> > it. Am I wrong? >> > >> >> Are anybody pushing people to avoid .su? I.e. how much effort are >> the .su-maintainers putting into convincing people to use the individual >> ccTLDs instead? ;-) >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Per Heldal - http://heldal.eml.cc/ >> -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From pk at DENIC.DE Thu Nov 2 12:10:26 2006 From: pk at DENIC.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 12:10:26 +0100 Subject: >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> References: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <20061102111026.GD1298@unknown.office.denic.de> On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:50:10PM +0300, Max Tulyev wrote: > Yeah, I see the big difference and using double-standards about two > domains SU/EU are both not in ISO list :( > > But hope we can help to move it right way ;) ... provided "we" != dns-wg, I guess. As David Conrad suggested, the policy issues are best dealt with through ICANN channels. What this WG could address are the operational requirements and consequences: 1) Is there an operational reason to phase out a TLD? 2) If a TLD were to be phased out, what precautions need to be taken? What are cleanup steps and how much name space poison will remain? Both voluntary and involuntary changes of domain name "ownership" do happen already and the question of phasing out the TLD is particluarly interesting only to the extent that the TLD is "different". -Peter From president at ukraine.su Thu Nov 2 12:14:15 2006 From: president at ukraine.su (Max Tulyev) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 14:14:15 +0300 Subject: >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <20061102111026.GD1298@unknown.office.denic.de> References: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> <20061102111026.GD1298@unknown.office.denic.de> Message-ID: <4549D307.3070807@ukraine.su> Seems to be reasonable. Could you please advice us a right place (mail list?) to continue discussing political issues? I'm digging iana/icann sites and still can't figure it out... Peter Koch wrote: > On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:50:10PM +0300, Max Tulyev wrote: > >> Yeah, I see the big difference and using double-standards about two >> domains SU/EU are both not in ISO list :( >> >> But hope we can help to move it right way ;) > > ... provided "we" != dns-wg, I guess. As David Conrad suggested, the > policy issues are best dealt with through ICANN channels. What this > WG could address are the operational requirements and consequences: > > 1) Is there an operational reason to phase out a TLD? There is _NO_ operational reasons to phase out at least SU. It is operational now and is growing fast. Is somebody disagree with me? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) From andre.koopal at nld.mci.com Thu Nov 2 12:28:01 2006 From: andre.koopal at nld.mci.com (Andre Koopal) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 12:28:01 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: References: <20061011192036.GG1282@unknown.office.denic.de> <45474147.9000909@ukraine.su> <45477DCE.8080505@icann.org> <45477F32.1070805@ukraine.su> <45479F64.8070802@dougbarton.us> <4547A287.5030500@psg.com> <4547A7DE.8030308@dougbarton.us> <45486542.8020802@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <20061102112801.GC14104@asoserve0.ams.ops.eu.uu.net> On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 10:49:44AM -0800, David Conrad wrote: > Max, > > If you believe IANA should depart from historical and existing > policies with regards to delegations and removals of two-letter top- > level domains, I would suggest you initiate an ICANN policy > development process within the appropriate supporting organization > (s). Until that time, IANA is pretty much constrained to follow > existing policies despite the fact that some people might be making > money registering names for a country that no longer exists. Or, convince the people maintaining the iso list, to re-add SU as at least a reserved TLD, as the country code still seems to be used. Politically it's better to solve the problem there then try to have ICANN make an exception. Regards, Andre Koopal > > Rgds, > -drc > > On Nov 1, 2006, at 1:13 AM, Max Tulyev wrote: > > >Doug Barton wrote: > > > >>My point is, we actually do have a policy here, and the SU operators > >>are running their operation with deliberate disregard for it. If you > >>don't like the policy, there are places to debate it, however since > >>this isn't one of them, I think I'll leave it at that. > > > >You also can take a look at official SU statistics, for example, > >previous month: > > > >http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/trend-20061031.shtml > >http://stat.nic.ru/en_su/2006/10/31/summ_trend-20061031.shtml > > > >This domain grows even it have huge price ( > >http://www.nic.ru/en/index.html ). So people really need it. > > > >-- > >WBR, > >Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO) > > > -- Andre Koopal EMEA Server & Service Management - Int ITSD Verizon Business H.J.E. Wenckebachweg 123 1096 AM Amsterdam Netherlands VNET: 711 6990 tel : +31 (0)20 711 6990 fax : +31 (0)20 711 2519 Verizon and MCI are now operating as Verizon Business ! This e-mail is strictly confidential and intended only for use by the addressee unless otherwise indicated. From david.conrad at icann.org Thu Nov 2 14:23:18 2006 From: david.conrad at icann.org (David Conrad) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 05:23:18 -0800 Subject: >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> References: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> Message-ID: Hi, On Nov 2, 2006, at 2:50 AM, Max Tulyev wrote: > Yeah, I see the big difference and using double-standards about two > domains SU/EU are both not in ISO list :( Not sure where you are seeing a double standard. As I believe has been pointed out: http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/02iso-3166-code- lists/iso_3166-1_decoding_table.html If you look up EU, you'll see it is yellow meaning "Code element may be used but restrictions may apply", whereas if you look up SU, you'll see it is grey meaning "Code element deleted from ISO 3166-1; stop using ASAP". Seems pretty definitive to me. >> Maybe, it's time to start CIS TLD ? Why not? After all, we already have .CAT (Catalan) and .ASIA. Rgds, -drc From david.conrad at icann.org Thu Nov 2 14:35:41 2006 From: david.conrad at icann.org (David Conrad) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 05:35:41 -0800 Subject: >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs In-Reply-To: <4549D307.3070807@ukraine.su> References: <4549CD62.9060203@ukraine.su> <20061102111026.GD1298@unknown.office.denic.de> <4549D307.3070807@ukraine.su> Message-ID: <909D27B3-3D97-4981-BF57-708E1F237E06@icann.org> Max, On Nov 2, 2006, at 3:14 AM, Max Tulyev wrote: > Seems to be reasonable. Could you please advice us a right place (mail > list?) to continue discussing political issues? You have a few choices. Assuming you want to pursue redefining IANA's ccTLD policy: ICANN's ccNSO: http://ccnso.icann.org wwTLD: http://www.wwtld.org/ CENTR: https://www.centr.org/ If you want to pursue a gTLD or sTLD like .CIS (which I suspect may be easier even despite the fact that the policy for creating new gTLDs has not yet been finalized): http://gnso.icann.org/ > There is _NO_ operational reasons to phase out at least SU. It is > operational now and is growing fast. Is somebody disagree with me? What happens when ISO-3166 MA reallocates SU to "South Ulalaville" (as they reallocated CS from "Czechoslovakia" to "Serbia and Montenegro")? IANA has no control over what ISO 3166 MA does and the potential for this sort of reallocation is non-neglible. This would seem to be an operational issue to me. The American colloquialism is "you are living on borrowed time"... Rgds, -drc From storch at infra.net Fri Nov 3 14:55:57 2006 From: storch at infra.net (Christian Storch) Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:55:57 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records Message-ID: <454B4A6D.6060508@infra.net> Hi, is there any reason for ns.ripe.net missing NS records of /24 reverse zones out of /16 reverse zones? Anyway we've a problem resolving ip addresses out of a couple of /16 reverse zones when asking ns.ripe.net as one of the secondaries for such a zone. Any thoughts or hints? Thanks, Christian From brettcarr at ripe.net Fri Nov 3 15:12:15 2006 From: brettcarr at ripe.net (Brett Carr) Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 15:12:15 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records In-Reply-To: <454B4A6D.6060508@infra.net> Message-ID: <20061103141215.4D26D2F593@herring.ripe.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: dns-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:dns-wg-admin at ripe.net] On > Behalf Of Christian Storch > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 2:56 PM > To: dns-wg at ripe.net > Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records > > Hi, > > is there any reason for ns.ripe.net missing NS records of /24 > reverse zones out of /16 reverse zones? > Anyway we've a problem resolving ip addresses out of a couple > of /16 reverse zones when asking ns.ripe.net as one of the > secondaries for such a zone. > > Any thoughts or hints? Christian, ns.ripe.net is generally a secondary and hence it carries the information provided by the relevant primary, however if you fo feel there Is a problem with the information that ns.ripe.net is serving then please let me know the specifics and I'd be happy to look into it for you. Brett -- Brett Carr Ripe Network Coordination Centre Manager -- DNS Services Group Singel 258 Amsterdam NL GPG Key fingerprint = F20D B2A7 C91D E370 44CF F244 B6A1 EF48 E743 F7D8 From storch at infra.net Fri Nov 3 15:45:45 2006 From: storch at infra.net (Christian Storch) Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 15:45:45 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records In-Reply-To: <20061103141215.4D26D2F593@herring.ripe.net> References: <20061103141215.4D26D2F593@herring.ripe.net> Message-ID: <454B5619.2060807@infra.net> Brett Carr wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dns-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:dns-wg-admin at ripe.net] On >> Behalf Of Christian Storch >> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 2:56 PM >> To: dns-wg at ripe.net >> Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records >> >> Hi, >> >> is there any reason for ns.ripe.net missing NS records of /24 >> reverse zones out of /16 reverse zones? >> Anyway we've a problem resolving ip addresses out of a couple >> of /16 reverse zones when asking ns.ripe.net as one of the >> secondaries for such a zone. >> >> Any thoughts or hints? >> > > Christian, > > ns.ripe.net is generally a secondary and hence it carries the information > provided by the relevant primary, however if you fo feel there Is a problem > with the information that ns.ripe.net is serving then please let me know the > specifics and I'd be happy to look into it for you. > > Brett > Brett, here are some examples: 193.197.192.11 195.30.231.17 212.227.85.10 Every /16 has ns.ripe.net as one secondary. But only the servers of the corresponding LIR will give you the NS records of the /24. E.g. try dig ns 192.197.193.in-addr.arpa @dns1.belwue.de and than dig ns 192.197.193.in-addr.arpa @ns.ripe.net So its like playing roulette for our resolver. Christian From brettcarr at ripe.net Fri Nov 3 15:57:20 2006 From: brettcarr at ripe.net (Brett Carr) Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 15:57:20 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records In-Reply-To: <454B5619.2060807@infra.net> Message-ID: <20061103145720.B7A1E2F593@herring.ripe.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: Christian Storch [mailto:storch at infra.net] > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 3:46 PM > To: Brett Carr > Cc: dns-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records > > Brett Carr wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: dns-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:dns-wg-admin at ripe.net] > On Behalf > >> Of Christian Storch > >> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 2:56 PM > >> To: dns-wg at ripe.net > >> Subject: [dns-wg] ns.ripe.net missing NS records > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> is there any reason for ns.ripe.net missing NS records of > /24 reverse > >> zones out of /16 reverse zones? > >> Anyway we've a problem resolving ip addresses out of a > couple of /16 > >> reverse zones when asking ns.ripe.net as one of the > secondaries for > >> such a zone. > >> > >> Any thoughts or hints? > >> > > > > Christian, > > > > ns.ripe.net is generally a secondary and hence it carries the > > information provided by the relevant primary, however if > you fo feel > > there Is a problem with the information that ns.ripe.net is serving > > then please let me know the specifics and I'd be happy to > look into it for you. > > > > Brett > > > Brett, > > here are some examples: > > 193.197.192.11 > 195.30.231.17 > 212.227.85.10 > > Every /16 has ns.ripe.net as one secondary. > But only the servers of the corresponding LIR will give you > the NS records of the /24. > E.g. try > > dig ns 192.197.193.in-addr.arpa @dns1.belwue.de > > and than > > dig ns 192.197.193.in-addr.arpa @ns.ripe.net > > So its like playing roulette for our resolver. > Christian, as far as I can tell (without having access to the relevant servers) this is possibly a misconfiguration on the primary. I've taken a look in the zonefile we have for 197.193.in-addr.arpa and there is no delegation for 192.197.193.in-addr.arpa within that file so ns.ripe.net does not know where to send you. My guess is that the LIR have the child zone configured on their server and that is why they are answering differently. Brett.. -- Brett Carr Ripe Network Coordination Centre Manager -- DNS Services Group Singel 258 Amsterdam NL GPG Key fingerprint = F20D B2A7 C91D E370 44CF F244 B6A1 EF48 E743 F7D8 From brettcarr at ripe.net Tue Nov 7 15:01:35 2006 From: brettcarr at ripe.net (Brett Carr) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 15:01:35 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] Maintenance Announcement Message-ID: <20061107140133.E36692F5A2@herring.ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicates] Dear Colleagues, On 9 November 2006, authoritative Reverse DNS Services on ns.ripe.net will be unavailable between 10:00 and 11:00 UTC. During this time we need to carry out important server maintenance work. We apologise in advance for any inconvenience. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please send an e-mail to dns at ripe.net. Regards, -- Brett Carr Ripe Network Coordination Centre Manager -- DNS Services Group Singel 258 Amsterdam NL GPG Key fingerprint = F20D B2A7 C91D E370 44CF F244 B6A1 EF48 E743 F7D8 From pk at DENIC.DE Tue Nov 21 12:26:51 2006 From: pk at DENIC.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:26:51 +0100 Subject: AI 51.1 [Re: [dns-wg] New RIPE Document available: RIPE-393] In-Reply-To: <20061025150514.GE2127@unknown.office.denic.de> References: <20061023095122.DD0D62F583@herring.ripe.net> <20061025150514.GE2127@unknown.office.denic.de> Message-ID: <20061121112651.GD6536@denics7.denic.de> Dear WG, > > http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-393.html > > this refers to our Action Item 51.1: > > Publish K-Root anycast measurement results through appropriate > channels with a RIPE document as a fallback. > > Please have a look at the document. Unless anyone disagrees until 2006-11-13, > the chairs will consider 51.1 done. Thanks to the authors for making the > results available. the deadline has passed without any comment/objection. 51.1 is "done". -Peter From pk at DENIC.DE Tue Nov 21 12:23:58 2006 From: pk at DENIC.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:23:58 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] Last Call on 51.3 "ns*.ripe.net secondary service policy" In-Reply-To: <20061025152919.GF2127@unknown.office.denic.de> References: <20061025152919.GF2127@unknown.office.denic.de> Message-ID: <20061121112358.GC6536@denics7.denic.de> Dear WG, > regarding action item 51.3 , [...] > The room unanimously agreed, so I'd like to ask for confirmation of this > suggestion here. If you disagree with closing 51.3, please speak up until > 2006-11-17, ideally providing specific suggestions at the same time. with one voice in support and no objections, 51.3 is now marked "done". -Peter From pk at DENIC.DE Tue Nov 21 12:20:29 2006 From: pk at DENIC.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:20:29 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] Last Call: DNS WG meeting minutes for RIPE 53 In-Reply-To: <20061101191231.GM539@unknown.office.denic.de> References: <20061101191231.GM539@unknown.office.denic.de> Message-ID: <20061121112029.GB6536@denics7.denic.de> Dear WG, > > and made available under . > > This is the real Last Call for comments on the minutes, to end in two > weeks, Wed 2006-11-15 23:59 UTC. no further comments have been received, so the minutes mentioned above are now final. Thanks, Peter From pk at DENIC.DE Fri Nov 24 16:20:46 2006 From: pk at DENIC.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:20:46 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] Last Call: Lameness Checking Proposal (AI 52.3) Message-ID: <20061124152046.GK6870@unknown.office.denic.de> Dear DNS WG, with reference to action item 52.3, the NCC has drafted a proposal for lame delegation checks, that was sent to the WG's list in September: Some refinements have been made and the proposal's current status is available at . In accordance with the minutes of our RIPE 53 meeting, this starts a Last Call ending Monday, 2006-12-11 12:00 UTC. Please send comments to this list. -Peter From brettcarr at ripe.net Tue Nov 28 11:21:53 2006 From: brettcarr at ripe.net (Brett Carr) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:21:53 +0100 Subject: [dns-wg] Maintenance Announcement Message-ID: <20061128102153.43D822F594@herring.ripe.net> [Apologies for duplicates] Dear Colleagues, On 30 November 2006, authoritative Reverse DNS Services on ns-pri.ripe.net will be unavailable between 09:00 and 10:00 UTC. During this time we need to carry out important server maintenance work. We apologise in advance for any inconvenience. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please send an e-mail to dns-help at ripe.net. Regards, -- Brett Carr Ripe Network Coordination Centre Manager -- DNS Services Group Singel 258 Amsterdam NL GPG Key fingerprint = F20D B2A7 C91D E370 44CF F244 B6A1 EF48 E743 F7D8