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] NCC reverse delegation criteria
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Using CDS delegation to add DS records (was Re: NCC reverse delegation criteria)
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] NCC reverse delegation criteria
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Anand Buddhdev
anandb at ripe.net
Tue Jun 11 10:52:00 CEST 2019
Good morning Måns, We will come back to you shortly with answers to your and others' questions in this thread. Regards, Anand Buddhdev RIPE NCC On 10/06/2019 09:22, Måns Nilsson wrote: > Recently, a discussion regarding the checks performed by the NCC before > reverse delegation is made came up on the members-discuss list. It was > concluded that this should be discussed here rather than there. > > The members archive might not be available to all, so I'll try to > summarize. Please add your take on summary if you find mine lacking. > > The questioned practice was that the NCC rejects the delegation request > if the target server is found to be an open recursor. > > Some participants argued that this is not a technical problem, and some > said yes it is. > > Some held that the NCC has no authority blocking a request, but it was > argued that every delegation is subject to RFC 1591 responsibilites. > > For starters, are the delegation requirements described somewhere? > > Best regards, >
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Using CDS delegation to add DS records (was Re: NCC reverse delegation criteria)
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] NCC reverse delegation criteria
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]