[dns-wg] Verisign to provide secondary DNS services for the RIPE NCC’s zones
Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Tue Oct 18 11:36:33 CEST 2016
> On 18 Oct 2016, at 10:09, Carsten Schiefner <ripe-wgs.cs at schiefner.de> wrote: > > in the light of transparency, will resp. can the contract be disclosed? > > If not, is it a contract (draft) that has been put on the table by the > NCC? Or, vice versa, VeriSign's standard contract for such services? Or > rather - as a result of heavy negotiations in smoke filled rooms behind > closed doors ;-) - an amalgam of both? > > Also, how (far) the three final bidders met the RfP requirements would > be interesting. I don't mind if the names of the non-winning two would > be anonymized. Hi Carsten. The contractual terms are implementation detail and therefore out of scope for the WG. This also applies to the RFP and NCC’s selection procedure. The WG should only intervene here -- ie by asking the NCC board to investigate -- if we have reason to believe the RFP and/or contract was unfair or defective in some way. The WG must not and can’t (try to) micromanage the NCC’s DNS team.
[ dns-wg Archives ]