In message <1a3d420a-32cc-464f-ada5-401a9dc76...@nic.br>, Rubens Kuhl writes:
>
> Besides ccTLD, out of ICANN contractual reach, looks like TLDs from
> Uniregistry (including ISC servers) and Neustar are the ones most
> mentioned here. Any outreach attempt, successful or otherwise, with
> Uniregis
Besides ccTLD, out of ICANN contractual reach, looks like TLDs from Uniregistry
(including ISC servers) and Neustar are the ones most mentioned here. Any
outreach attempt, successful or otherwise, with Uniregistry, ISC and Neustar ?
Rubens
> On May 18, 2015, at 8:50 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
Thanks for this, Mark. I’ll take a look at the report.
Regards,
--
Francisco.
On 5/18/15, 4:50 PM, "Mark Andrews" wrote:
>
>Can we get DNS and EDNS Protocol Compliance added to the acceptance
>criteria for nameservers for TLDs.
>
>http://ednscomp.isc.org/compliance/tld-report.html
>
>show
On May 18, 2015, at 4:50 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Can we get DNS and EDNS Protocol Compliance added to the acceptance
> criteria for nameservers for TLDs.
>
> http://ednscomp.isc.org/compliance/tld-report.html
>
> shows this is NOT happening. It isn't hard to test for. Eight dig
> queries per
Can we get DNS and EDNS Protocol Compliance added to the acceptance
criteria for nameservers for TLDs.
http://ednscomp.isc.org/compliance/tld-report.html
shows this is NOT happening. It isn't hard to test for. Eight dig
queries per server is all that was required to generate this report.
Mark
On 5/18/15, 7:12 AM, "John R Levine" wrote:
>> These comments might be more usefully said in the relevant ICANN forums.
>
>If you could suggest which ones those are, I can certainly send a note.
>Like Paul, I just don't have time to follow all of the ever larger set of
>ICANN processes.
I don’t
On May 18, 2015, at 2:07 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> I look somewhat unfavorably on the act of automatically populating zones
> on a customers behalf upstream of their cpe for the same reason I not
> so interested in autmatically injecting host-id signaling, or in fact
> from dynmic dns updates usin
On 5/14/15 6:48 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On May 14, 2015, at 2:52 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>> It would be super-annoying for delegations to nameservers that do
>> not exist to occur for these, because not only will there be
>> trillions of them but I get to wait for them to time out, so
>> delegation
On 5/15/15 8:48 AM, str4d wrote:
> Hugo Maxwell Connery wrote:
>> Hi,
>
>> I believe that the grothoff and appelbaum drafts are the first
>> cases of testing the mechanism for the use of the special names
>> registry. I also assume that the registry was created to be used
>> for more than i
These comments might be more usefully said in the relevant ICANN forums.
If you could suggest which ones those are, I can certainly send a note.
Like Paul, I just don't have time to follow all of the ever larger set of
ICANN processes.
Steve
On May 17, 2015, at 7:07 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
10 matches
Mail list logo
