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] Deletion of ns-v6.ripe.net
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Deletion of ns-v6.ripe.net
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Deletion of ns-v6.ripe.net
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Tue Apr 24 17:25:59 CEST 2018
> On 24 Apr 2018, at 15:51, Job Snijders <job at ntt.net> wrote: > > At least this is a good sign: https://github.com/search?q=ns-v6.ripe.net&type=Code Thanks Job. Though I wasn’t thinking (or caring) about github crapware. I was thinking about stuff that might have been written for internal use -- say at an ISP -- and would only show up whenever these scripts or whatever made queries for ns-v6.ripe.net. As I’m sure we all realise, there’s a long tail of legacy cruft out there. So even when some name gets removed from the DNS (or isn't found in github), that doesn’t necessarily mean that the name is no longer used. For instance, there’s still traffic going to IP addresses for root servers that were renumbered years ago. Admittedly that’s not quite the same thing because the names of the root servers in question haven’t gone away, but it illustrates the point I was trying to make.
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Deletion of ns-v6.ripe.net
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Deletion of ns-v6.ripe.net
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]