- dns-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: How safe are our domain names from US sanctions?
by Joe Abley 15 Sep '26

15 Sep '26

On 15 Sep 2026, at 08:47, Named T. Relay via dns-wg <dns-wg(a)ripe.net> wrote: > For decentralization's sake, i make the suggestion to move one of > the three main TLD's (.net, .com, .org) under Europa's management. > This might distribute and improve legal stability of the DNS ecosystem. > (And if this is not possible, that is indicative of a problem with DNS!) I assume you are at least partially trolling, but no doubt there is an undercurrent of (understandable) community outrage that would like to imagine you were not. Problems abound at the intersection of jurisdiction and topology. Much like choosing a week for a global meeting that does not conflict with anybody's holiday, it is difficult to imagine a solution here that mitigates every theoretical problem. And if you could find such a unicorn on a Friday, chances are good it would not last through the weekend. I appreciate the DNS is often the default solution to every problem, but, really, not this one. This time the DNS is just a symptom. Joe

1 0

How safe are our domain names from US sanctions?
by Timo Hilbrink 15 Sep '26

15 Sep '26

Hi all, As we all know, the DNS infrastructure has been built to be decentralised and resilient, so that its functionality does not depend on a single continent, country or government. But what if your gTLD domain name can be wiped out of the DNS by a single government? This is exactly what happened to Autistici/Inventati (A/I), an Italian non-profit, volunteer-run service provider that caters to hundreds of activist groups around the world. They have operated using the autistici.org domain name for the past 25 years. On August 26, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) at the US Department of the Treasury included them in their list of “Specially Designated Global Terrorists” (SDGT). On August 28, PIR, the US headquartered registry operator for the .org TLD, placed autistici.org on status severHold, effectively wiping it from the DNS. This all happened without A/I committing any crime, neither in Italy nor in the US, and without any prosecutor ever indicting them either for felonies or misdemeanors. Simply the fact they provided services to certain activist groups that may be labeled as controversial or extremist by some authorities, was enough to place the whole provider on the SDGT list. In this case it was PIR (created by ISOC) that acted on the sanctions imposed by OFAC, although PIR still hasn't officially released any statement about this. A lot of organisations with an .org domain name are now very concerned about the future of their domains, but .org is not the only large gTLD that is run by a US based registry operator, both .net and .com are operated by Verisign, which is also headquartered in the US. So we can not rule out that something similar could happen to other domains. As an example: Just over two weeks ago, the US Department of the Treasury has begun "Operation Economic Outcast: an unprecedented, whole-of-government, economic campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran and its enablers. The Treasury is significantly expanding sanctions risk for those who continue to choose to do business with Iran." What if RIPE NCC would be classified as an organisation that provides services to sanctioned entities, could that mean that ripe.net gets put on serverHold? Should we still depend so heavily on US based gTLD registry operators? For more background on the A/I case, see: https://www.article19.org/resources/usa-terrorism-designation-has-global-co… https://keepitfree.ai/ https://www.inventati.org/ Timo

2 1

Call for Presentations (deadline approaching fast)
by Ulrich Wisser 07 Sep '26

07 Sep '26

Dear DNS working group, A short reminder that RIPE 93 will be held from 26 to 30 October 2026 in Sofia, Bulgaria. Our working group session is currently scheduled for 29 October at 11:00 local time, but please note that this may still change. This email is our official call for topics for the DNS Working Group session. Since RIPE 91, all plenary and working group proposals have been submitted through the same system, Pretalx. Please submit your proposals by 15 September 2026 using the following link: https://pretalx.ripe.net/ripe-93/cfp Alternatively, you may still send your proposals directly to us at <dns-wg-chairs AT ripe.net>. If you are using Pretalx, please pay special attention to the following fields: • Talk type: "Lightning talk" or "Talk" • Track: "DNS WG" • Duration: Time in minutes for the presentation and Q&A. This may differ from the default duration for the selected talk type. You can find more information about the Pretalx system here: https://ripe93.ripe.net/present/how-to-submit-a-proposal/ As usual, participation in the working group session is possible both in person and remotely. We plan to send out the first round of notifications at the end of September 2026. Cheers, RIPE DNS Working Group co-chairs (Marc, Ulrich and Yevheniya)

1 0

Stale IPv6 glue in the root zone for four ccTLDs
by Patrik Wallstrom 25 Aug '26

25 Aug '26

Hi, In a recent run of my gonemaster analysis of all the TLDs, I just discovered that four ccTLDs has stale glue in the root for the RIPE nameservers, https://gonemaster.evilbit.de/analysis/tags/OUT_OF_BAILIWICK_ADDR_MISMATCH?… It's for the ccTLDs ne, ps, sd, and tj, which as the nameservers [ne|ps|sd|tj].cctld.authdns.ripe.net that all have old glue. I have not seen this before, but also I have just updated the testcase specification for this specifically, as the root does not always give all the glue from the root. Just a heads up to whoever manages this glue. / Patrik

5 4

Fwd: Draft liaison statement on Public ENUM under e164.arpa for the September 2026 ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting
by Hisham Ibrahim 17 Aug '26

17 Aug '26

Dear colleagues, I am sharing this message the DNS, Database, RIPE NCC Services Working Group mailing lists to ensure all relevant working groups are informed. If you wish to share thoughts in response, please reply to the thread on the RIPE NCC coop-WG mailing list. Regards Hisham ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Hisham Ibrahim <HMI(a)ripe.net> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 at 17:40 Subject: Draft liaison statement on Public ENUM under e164.arpa for the September 2026 ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting To: <cooperation-wg(a)ripe.net> Dear colleagues, Following the earlier discussions on Public ENUM under e164.arpa, I have prepared the following draft liaison statement for the September 2026 ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting. In my draft I tried to: - clarify the RIPE NCC’s position following SG2-C-0196*, - support the confirmation of the revised interim procedures**, - outline how the responses to TSB Circular 123*** could inform the treatment of individual delegations, - and provide an updated overview of the operational status of the current delegations. I would appreciate feedback on my draft and I would appreciate it if you could share any comments or concerns, particularly on the technical, procedural or governance aspects, by 25 August, so that the RIPE NCC can incorporate the feedback before finalizing the submission. Many thanks in advance for your review. Regards, Hisham * https://www.ripe.net/media/documents/ENUM_liaison_statement_ITU_T_SG2.pdf ** https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/inr/enum/Pages/procedures.aspx *** https://www.itu.int/md/T25-TSB-CIR-0123/en To: ITU-T Study Group 2, September 2026 Meeting Title: RIPE NCC liaison statement on ENUM (e164.arpa) Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC thanks ITU-T Study Group 2, the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau, the Internet Architecture Board, Member States and ENUM delegation operators for their continued engagement concerning Public ENUM under e164.arpa. The RIPE NCC operates the e164.arpa zone as the IAB’s designated operator under the established coordination arrangements involving the IAB, ITU-T and the RIPE NCC. 1. RIPE NCC position At the February 2026 meeting of Study Group 2, the RIPE NCC submitted contribution SG2-C-0196. The contribution arose from an operational question concerning support for ENUM domain objects through the Registration Data Access Protocol, but also raised broader questions concerning the future status of ENUM and e164.arpa. Following subsequent engagement with the IAB, ENUM delegation operators and members of the RIPE community, the RIPE NCC recognizes that those broader questions did not accurately reflect the established distribution of responsibilities. This statement therefore clarifies and supersedes the relevant parts of SG2-C-0196. For the avoidance of doubt, the RIPE NCC supports the continued operation of Public ENUM under e164.arpa and is not proposing its closure. SG2-C-0196 no longer represents a request for Study Group 2 to determine the technical or architectural future of ENUM or e164.arpa. Any future consideration of a system-wide change would require coordination involving the IAB, the relevant IETF and ITU-T processes, the RIPE NCC and affected stakeholders. 2. Operational status and revised procedures The RIPE NCC has reviewed the 46 current delegations recorded in the RIPE Database. Of these, 23 showed no DNS issue at the top delegation level, 17 appeared non-operational and six showed partial DNS issues. These findings identify a registry-maintenance and data-accuracy issue. They do not provide a sufficient basis for a system-wide conclusion concerning Public ENUM or e164.arpa. The RIPE NCC therefore welcomes the revised Interim procedures for Geographic Country Codes (ENUM administration ad interim) contained in TD423 Rev.1/PLEN. The revised procedures provide an appropriate mechanism for addressing individual non-operational or expired temporary delegations while preserving functioning delegations and the ability of Member States to confirm, update, withdraw or subsequently restore their delegations. Responses to TSB Circular 123 may provide useful information concerning the status and intentions of individual national delegations. The RIPE NCC considers that such information should inform individual cases under the revised procedures, rather than a system-wide conclusion concerning Public ENUM or e164.arpa. 3. Request to Study Group 2 The RIPE NCC respectfully invites Study Group 2 to: - confirm that the revised procedures contained in TD423 Rev.1/PLEN will come into force at the September 2026 meeting and will provide the applicable mechanism for addressing individual non-operational or expired temporary delegations; and - continue coordination with the IAB, the RIPE NCC, the relevant IETF processes and affected stakeholders on any broader questions concerning the technical or long-term status of ENUM and e164.arpa. Once the revised procedures come into force, the RIPE NCC intends to apply them systematically and transparently, including by refreshing its technical assessment, engaging with relevant delegation operators where possible and submitting substantiated cases to TSB. The question of Registration Data Access Protocol support is separate from the continued operation of Public ENUM and will be considered through the appropriate technical and community processes. The RIPE NCC remains committed to working constructively with Study Group 2, TSB, the IAB, Member States, delegation operators and the RIPE community to maintain e164.arpa in a stable, accurate and technically sound manner.

1 0

DNS Resolver Recommender
by Richter, Robert 14 Aug '26

14 Aug '26

Hello everybody! We built the tool “DNS Resolver Recommender”: * https://dns.diic-hpi.org It is a small DoH measurement tool that should catch DNS behavior from the user’s browser. It measures a list of 200+ public DoH resolvers for both cached and uncached domains and recommends the best one for the user. Upon opt-in, we also collect the (anonymized) measurement data for research (see the Privacy Disclosure<https://dns.diic-hpi.org/privacy.html>). We made every effort to collect only data that maintains privacy. In the future, we also want to release snapshots of our data to the community. Therefore, I am writing to this mailing list: We would greatly appreciate it if you tried the tool and, if you feel comfortable, also activate the opt-in to support our research work. Thank you in advance! Best regards, Robert

4 3

Resolved: NRTM issue affecting reverse DNS provisioning
by Florian Obser 13 Aug '26

13 Aug '26

Dear colleagues, Between 00:06 on 2 August and 12:30 (UTC) on 4 August, we experienced an issue affecting our Near Real Time Mirroring (NRTM) service. Since our reverse DNS provisioning system also uses NRTM, updates to the global DNS were delayed over this period. All pending updates were processed once we applied a fix to the NRTM issue. We plan to publish a brief post-mortem report with more details soon. You can always check the status of our services at status.ripe.net. Kind regards, Florian Obser Principal Engineer, DNS RIPE NCC

1 1

Nominet DNS Fund
by Lizzie Griffiths 13 Aug '26

13 Aug '26

Hello, We are excited to share that the Nominet DNS Fund is now open for its second application window, with £650,000 available to support open source projects that underpin the internet's core infrastructure. Following a strong first round, this latest funding window brings increased investment and greater flexibility. We are looking to support both new and existing projects, including one-off initiatives and longer-term work that improves the sustainability of essential DNS technologies. If you are working on open source DNS software, tooling, or infrastructure - this is an opportunity to secure funding for work that is critical but often under-resourced. Successful projects from the first round span DNS libraries, testbeds and operational tools used by registries around the world, highlighting the real-world impact of this community. Applications are open now and will close on 17th August at 9am BST. Find out more and apply on the Nominet website: https://nominet.uk/our-impact/nominet-dns-fund/

2 1

Help us identify community-driven sessions for the November 11 following OARC 47
by Jerry Lundström 23 Jul '26

23 Jul '26

Hi, We are planning to offer a full day of community-driven sessions on Wednesday, 11 November, immediately following the main OARC 47 workshop. We'd like to hear from the broader DNS and Internet operations community. What topics or activities would you like to see happen, and what could be realistically organized—or that you would be interested in helping organize? Recent workshop feedback included interest in tutorials and short training sessions, working group and interest group side meetings, BOFs, hackathons, tool demos, and operator round-tables. To make this useful, we need more than topic suggestions: we are especially looking for people who are willing to host a session, help organize one, or point us toward someone who has already expressed interest in leading a specific project, topic, or discussion. This additional day will not require a separate registration fee for OARC 47 attendees. We have conference rooms available from 08:30–16:30 on the 11 November. Each room can accommodate up to 15 participants and includes basic boardroom AV. The day is currently planned around the following schedule: - 08:30–10:00 session block - 10:00–10:30 morning coffee break - 10:30–12:00 session block - 12:00–13:00 lunch - 13:00–14:30 session block - 14:30–15:00 afternoon coffee break - 15:00–16:30 session block Sessions may use one or more blocks depending on the format, organizer availability, and room scheduling. Possible formats include: - hands-on tutorials - OARC tools training or demos - software demos - BOFs - hackathons - focused working group or interest group meetings (for instance standards or BCP discussions) - operator round-tables - "help me brainstorm this problem" sessions If you are willing to host something, help organize something, or connect us with someone who may be a good lead for a specific session, please complete the following form by *24 August 2026 23:59 UTC*. Form Link <https://zfrmz.com/arOnEOkvgGa9UoqvwOGn> The form also includes a small section for attendee interest, but our immediate priority is identifying sessions with a potential host, organizer, or named point of contact. Submitting a proposal does not guarantee a confirmed room or time slot. OARC staff will review responses and follow up to confirm session details, timing, room fit, and any support needed. We hope this additional day can create space for practical work, smaller-group discussions, and hands-on knowledge sharing that can be difficult to fit into the regular workshop agenda. Best, DNS-OARC

1 0

OARC 47 Call for Contribution
by Ulrich Wisser 18 Jul '26

18 Jul '26

This workshop will be a hybrid event. Date - 09-10 November 2026 Location - Vancouver, British Columbia Times - approximately 10:00-17:00 PDT (Local time PDT is UTC -7; note that British Columbia has opted to remain on PDT all year round) Deadline for Submissions - 2026-08-24 23:59 UTC https://indico.dns-oarc.net/event/58/abstracts/ All DNS-related subjects and discussion topics are welcome although we're particularly keen to hear more about operational and security related experiences, best practices and practical advice; both for newcomers to the DNS arena and those who have been around for longer who want to learn more about new features and opportunities to improve resilience, security and privacy. (These topics we think will complement the usual high-quality data-based research submissions we always hope to receive!) If you have something interesting to share with the community that lies outside of the focus above, please don't be put off - if it's good, we'll be happy to include it. You can also contact us directly at submissions(a)dns-oarc.net<mailto:submissions@dns-oarc.net> if you would like to ask about the suitability of a potential presentation submission topic. If you'd like to offer a talk, but are not quite sure what to pick, here's a non-exhaustive list of ideas: 1. Operations & Deployment · Configuration management, deployment processes, and interoperability experiences. · Tools, tips, and making effective use of DNS software features. 2. Performance, Resilience & Scaling · Provisioning, load-balancing, and planning for resilience. · DNS performance management, efficiency improvements, and metrics. · Monitoring infrastructure: log pipelines, analytics, and anomaly detection. 3. Security, Privacy & Policy · DoS attacks, DNS abuse, DNSSEC signing and validation. · Privacy considerations, for example: encrypted transport, qname minimization, data anonymization. · Relevant global and regional policies, legislation, and compliance. 4. Research & Innovation · Data-driven testing, measurement, and analysis. · New protocols, protocol extensions, and next-generation namespace management. 5. Lessons & Learnings · Outage experiences, recovery stories, and cautionary tales · For further details please see https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc47 ..., for the DNS-OARC Programme Committee Ulrich

1 0