2005-02 Last Call for Comments (IP Assignments for Anycasting DNS)
PDP Number: 2005-02 IP Assignments for anycasting DNS Dear Colleagues The proposal described in 2005-02 is now in its Concluding Phase. You can find the full proposal at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-2.html During the review phase, we received feedback that suggested improvements to the text: - The resulting policy text should explicitly state that it is for ccTLDs and gTLDs - The text should explicitly state that the RIPE NCC will make assignments directly when a request is submitted through an existing LIR. We have incorporated this in the draft documents that you can find at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/2005-02-draft.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/2005-02-v6-draft.html Please e-mail any final comments about this proposal to address-policy-wg@ripe.net before 18 September 2006. If we receive no objections, we will publish the new policy after this date. Regards Filiz Yilmaz RIPE NCC Policy Development Officer
- The resulting policy text should explicitly state that it is for ccTLDs and gTLDs
Have ENUM country subdelegations been considered for inclusion in this category? Nick
Dear Nick,
- The resulting policy text should explicitly state that it is for ccTLDs and gTLDs
Have ENUM country subdelegations been considered for inclusion in this category?
ENUM subdelegations have so far not been discussed to be eligible for this policy. I have no feelings if there are objections against adding ENUM subdelegations to the list. I prefer to bring the consensus of two year discusion into a policy now and start the discussion about adding ENUM subdelegations as soon as the policy has passed. As the deployment of ENUM grows it should be no problem to reach consensus to assign anycast resources to ENUM subdelegations as well. This can be very important for those who will not, or cannot share anycast resources between domains. I hope this approach is okay with you Andreas
I have no feelings if there are objections against adding ENUM subdelegations to the list. I prefer to bring the consensus of two year discusion into a policy now and start the discussion about adding ENUM subdelegations as soon as the policy has passed.
I think that this is probably the best way to deal with the issue. ENUM deployment is not widespread right now, and there seems no reason to delay the implementation of 2005-02 on this basis. But it may need to be addressed in a future policy amendment proposal. Nick
participants (3)
-
Andreas Bäß/Denic -
Filiz Yilmaz -
Nick Hilliard