[dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jorma Mellin
jorma at jmellin.net
Tue Nov 18 15:50:19 CET 2014
My 0.2c I remember the day when ripe.net -domain was unreachable because of failure to renew it. The hassle was pretty big, as it took a long time to convince the domain registry (at U.S) to understand that "yes, we really need this at european territory”. This was the primary reason to register .int as well. I have no clue have the situation changed about this but if not why to get rid of the backup? Jorma On 18 Nov 2014, at 16:38, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote: > On 18/11/2014 11:16, Niall O'Reilly wrote: >> Let's have RIPE.INT removed. > > tbh, I see no reason to remove ripe.int. > > If ICANN has concerns about the delegation, then they should raise them > formally with the RIPE NCC. > > If the "registration is out of (current) policy with respect to registrants > in that domain", it's unclear why this is a RIPE NCC problem. The domain > has been around since 2001 so if there's been a problem, why has it taken > 13 years for people to get worked up about it? > > Please leave it alone. > > Nick > >
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]