[dns-wg] Request for trusted party to provide secondary DNS services for the RIPE NCC’s zones
Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Jul 25 18:49:51 CEST 2016
> On 25 Jul 2016, at 16:56, Romeo Zwart <romeo.zwart at ripe.net> wrote: > > Hi Jim, > Thanks for the quick response. > > On 16/07/25 17:42 , Jim Reid wrote: >> The above URL doesn’t say very much. Could you please provide some more details? > > As expressed on the page mentioned above, the intention of the process > is that interested parties respond to the email address quoted to be > sent the detailed RfP document. Well, it would be nice if the web page actually said something like “interested parties can get the RFP documention by contacting the NCC at...”. :-) BTW, it makes sense not to publish the RFP bumf at this stage in case it encourages members of the WG to try to micro-manage what is an implementation/operational matter for the NCC. Though in the interests of openness and transparency it might be worthwhile publishing that document once the service provider(s) has been chosen. > I'd invite you to do so if you are interested to provide services. :) Hell no! I have enough trouble looking after my own zones without looking after the NCC’s too. :-) > We have tried to make these requirements as clear as possible, including > distinctions between mandatory and optional elements, and we have > documented those in the document that will be sent on request. Great! It’s a pity this isn’t mentioned in the announcement. > It would indeed be unrealistic to expect detailed responses based on the > limited information that is on the mentioned web page. That is clearly > not our expectation. I’m glad to hear that Romeo. Though until your recent clarification email, I fear you may well have given prospective bidders that impression. >> I also think it’s a bit optimistic to give bidders just three weeks to prepare their responses. More so during peak holiday season. Why the rush? > > We are expecting experienced and professional service providers to > respond, who have the required infrastructure and service machinery in > place and for whom three weeks will be a suitable period to respond. It’s always fun to make bidders sweat a bit and watch them squirm. :-) I’ve done it myself more than a few times when running RFPs. However you may well be pushing things to get good quality bids in such a short time-frame when just about everyone will be on holiday. I’d like to be proven wrong about that.
[ dns-wg Archives ]