[dns-wg] RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors

On 11/18/14 6:38 AM, 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.

You don't find the fact that it's been out of scope for INT for over a 
decade to be compelling? We removed ip6.int for similar reasons, and 
that actually had a purpose at one point in the past.

> If ICANN has concerns about the delegation, then they should raise them
> formally with the RIPE NCC.

It's been raised informally a non-zero number of times in the past. Why 
do you think that creating a kerfuffle over something simple is the 
right way to go?

There seems to be a fairly large consensus that the domain should be 
removed, and Jim has asked some intelligent operational questions about 
its use that IMO should be answered.

Doug