This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/dns-wg@ripe.net/

[dns-wg] RIPE NCC domain registrations

Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE NCC domain registrations
Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] retaining ripe.int

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Peter Koch pk at DENIC.DE
Tue Jun 30 19:53:39 CEST 2015

Hi,

</hatless><shed color=blk/>

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 02:30:39PM +0200, Romeo Zwart wrote:

> Some of these domains were only registered as a "protection"
> mechanism, which was considered good practice at the time.

and probably still is?  There's probably no actual value in
keeping them for a use, but once they are relaesed, they might
be "parked' in shady places of town.  So unless the internal
procedural cost is going to hurt - just keep'em.

> ripe.int

This is probably an exception for the lack of a drop catching risk,
but keeping the domain to maintain a stake in the INT domain
might be OK.

-Peter

Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] RIPE NCC domain registrations
Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] retaining ripe.int

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ dns-wg Archives ]