Subject: Re: [dns-wg] NCC reverse delegation criteria Date: Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:10:01PM +0200 Quoting Jonas Frey (j...@probe-networks.de): > Ian, > > > > I'd argue that it is not controversial at all. > > We have good BCP and the RIPE NCC delegation checks it. > > By all means wait for the RIPE NCC to respond, but I see no reason to > > change the status quo. > > This seems like a complaint about nothing of importance IMHO. > > > > Ian > > Well, even if you do not want to change the status quo then this > complaint has one undoubtful point: > This whole BCP (whatever that includes in detail) is nowhere > documented.
It is now, since Anand replied to the list, in <68c1d8f7-7b0b-a5d0-d1ed-d75f21562...@ripe.net> . I suggest that we perform the absolute minimum of policy footwork to endorse this procedure as is. Because I feel we have a strong if not absolute consensus for carrying on as usual from those who spoke up here. I'm a tad rusty on procedure here, so others will have to help with how we continue. Regards, -- Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina MN-1334-RIPE SA0XLR +46 705 989668 Xerox your lunch and file it under "sex offenders"!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
