[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 ]
Doug Barton
dougb at dougbarton.us
Tue Nov 18 22:40:40 CET 2014
On 11/18/14 1:38 PM, Lutz Donnerhacke wrote: > * Nick Hilliard 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. > I second that. Why? What value does a formal request from ICANN have over the RIPE community simply doing the right thing with an old domain that no longer has relevance? Doug
- 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 ]