RIPE NCC secondary name services for ccTLDs
Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC offers a best-effort secondary name service for ccTLDs in the start-up phase of their organisational life. At RIPE 68 you, the working group, provided us with some guidelines regarding the eligibility of new zones to be added to this service. We intend to document these guidelines in the form of a new RIPE Document*, of which a draft version is attached to this email. We welcome any comments you may have on this document. Kind regards, Romeo Zwart * Actually, an earlier version of this document has already been published as a RIPE Document, but this was a procedural error on our part, which will be corrected.
Dear Romeo,
At RIPE 68 you, the working group, provided us with some guidelines regarding the eligibility of new zones to be added to this service. We intend to document these guidelines in the form of a new RIPE Document*, of which a draft version is attached to this email.
We welcome any comments you may have on this document.
Thank you for this document. I think it reflects very nicely all the aspects discussed by the ad-hoc group and by the DNS-WG at RIPE 68. I have a small comment regarding the first bullet of point 4., which now reads: "If the number of delegations in the zone, or in any of its child zones, exceeds 10,000..." I think this clearly refers to any public child zone, i.e. a child zone that is administered by the ccTLD itself, and not to a delegated zone managed by a third party. Therefore I suggest adding the word "public" before "child". Best regards, Janos
Kind regards, Romeo Zwart
On 11/12/2015 09:41 AM, Romeo Zwart wrote:
The RIPE NCC offers a best-effort secondary name service for ccTLDs in the start-up phase of their organisational life.
At RIPE 68 you, the working group, provided us with some guidelines regarding the eligibility of new zones to be added to this service. We intend to document these guidelines in the form of a new RIPE Document*, of which a draft version is attached to this email.
We welcome any comments you may have on this document.
Under "4. Eligibility Criteria" the 2nd and 3rd points say "there is no need for the RIPE NCC's secondary service for this zone", but the first point says "no longer in the start-up phase". It's unclear what the difference is, if there is a material difference than perhaps that could be clarified, or if none, maybe the language should be made common to all 3 clauses ? Keith
participants (3)
-
Janos Zsako -
Keith Mitchell -
Romeo Zwart