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 ]
Anand Buddhdev
anandb at ripe.net
Tue Apr 24 17:46:50 CEST 2018
On 24/04/2018 17:33, Gert Doering wrote: Hi Gert, > OTOH it might be worth some considerations about "soft landing" - that > is, point ns-v6.ripe.net at a new server that logs queries, respons to > everything with SERVFAIL (or forwards to ns.ripe.net?), and if you see > significant traffic, contact the sender and notify them of the coming > end... I now realise I should have made this even more explicit: ns.ripe.net and ns-v6.ripe.net are the same server, and have the same IP addresses. It's near-impossible for us to tell whether someone is resolving ns-v6.ripe.net, and then sending queries to its addresses. However, having two names makes our pre-delegation and provisioning somewhat more complex, and so we wish to simplify things. We did check that the name ns-v6.ripe.net was not listed as the target of any NS record in any delegations or apices, to ensure that reverse DNS resolution is not affected. Regards, Anand
- 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 ]