- dns-wg - mailman.ripe.net

DNS-WG Draft agenda
by Jaap Akkerhuis 22 Oct '14

22 Oct '14

Apologies for the delay, but ICANN ate my homework and a disk crash didn't help either. Anyway, here is the draft agenda for the DNS-WG. jaap

1 0

time slot for RIPE NCC update
by Romeo Zwart 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 dear Chairs, As usual, we would like to have a time slot for a quick update from the RIPE NCC. Some 15 minutes would be sufficient. Anand will, as usual, present this. Also, are there any updates on the outstanding issues we have discussed on the list previously (the 'policy-statement' around ccTLD secondary; adding new zones to DNSMON and visualisation delay for DNSMON)? Discussion on these topics seems to have dried up a long time ago. It would be great if we can achieve formal closure on these during the coming meeting. Would it be useful to specifically schedule an agenda item to have the WG formalise their decisions? Kind regards, Romeo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iEYEARECAAYFAlRE5icACgkQGRL9suBV+er0zQCfdDZfzV7DCkAGXqYp+uC1nabY qD8AoIGmwV9pHuexvyLztjtr/vMsHKvn =v1VY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

heads-up on dec.com domain
by Nick Hilliard 11 Oct '14

11 Oct '14

folks, for those not already aware, control of the dec.com domain was transferred to an unknown third party a couple of weeks ago and is no longer owned by HP Inc, Hewlett-Packard Enterprise or anyone with prior responsibility to the remains of Digital Equipment Corporation. This means that the address records for the uucp-gw-{1,2}.pa.dec.com nameservers are controlled by an unknown third party. Most organisations migrated away from these host names many moons ago (including all but one cctld), but there are still some second-level domains out there who use these hosts for NS records. If any ccTLDs recognise this these host names in their zone files, the old farts still using them might appreciate a heads up on what's happened and what they need to do. Nick

5 4

proposal for appointment/removal of WG co-chairs
by Jim Reid 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

Colleagues, you may be aware that all RIPE Working Groups have been asked to devise and document a procedure for the selection of its Chairs. Some WGs have started to do that. Each WG is expected to come up with its own mechanism and decide on that themselves. My personal view is WGs are too different and the community is too diffuse for consensus to emerge on a "one size fits all" approach any time soon. Perhaps WGs will converge on a common approach in a few years in light of experience with whatever mechanisms get adopted in the coming months. However, that should not delay each WG deciding on a procedure and using it. And documenting it of course! With that in mind, here's a proposal for you to consider. The objective here is to have something simple and lightweight with the minimum of "rules" and "process". Feel free to disagree if you prefer something more elaborate. The key points in the draft are (a) the WG decides for itself how the WG gets run; (b) we work by consensus; (c) decisions are taken on the list; (d) there is an element of rotation. As well as the expected list discussion, there will be some time in the WG agenda for RIPE69 to discuss matters. The hope is the WG can reach consensus on an appointment/removal mechanism by the end of the year (ish) and the first run of the WG Chair beauty contest (swimsuit round optional) by RIPE70(ish) in 2015. Comments welcome. # # $Id: appointment,v 1.6 2014/10/06 11:46:56 jim Exp $ # [1] The DNS WG will have N co-chairs. N will normally be 2 or 3, as determined by the WG. [2] A co-chair will serve a term of N years, where N is the number of co-chairs. Terms will be staggered so that one term expires every year. A co-chair cannot serve more than 2 consecutive terms. [3] The WG will be given adequate notice that a co-chair's term is ending and to invite applications for that position. Anyone can volunteer for appointment. [4] At the end of a co-chair's term, the WG will decide by consensus who is appointed to the available co-chair position. In the event of a tie, the consensus tied candidates will draw lots. [5] The WG may decide by consensus to remove a WG co-chair at any time. [6] Consensus will be determined on the DNS WG mailing list. The consensus judgement will be made by the serving WG co-chair(s) and will exclude the co-chair who is the subject of that consensus judgement. [7] Any appeal over a consensus decision will be heard by the RIPE Chair (or their deputy) whose decision shall be final.

3 4

Call For Presentations RIPE 69, deadline 31 August 2014
by Benno Overeinder 25 Sep '14

25 Sep '14

Dear colleagues, Please find the CFP for RIPE 69 in London below. The deadline for submissions is 31 August 2014. Please also note that speakers do not receive any extra reduction or funding towards the meeting fee at the RIPE Meetings. Kind regards, RIPE PC http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-meetings/pc --------------------- Call for Presentations A RIPE Meeting is an open event where Internet Service Providers, network operators and other interested parties get together. Although the meeting is mostly technical, it is also a chance for people to meet and network with others in their field. RIPE 69 will take place from 3-7 November 2014 in London, UK. The RIPE Programme Committee (PC) is now seeking content proposals from the RIPE community for the plenary session presentations, BoFs (Birds of a Feather sessions), panels, workshops, tutorials and lightning talks at RIPE 69. The PC is looking for presentations covering topics of network engineering and operations, including but not limited to: - IPv6 deployment - Managing IPv4 scarcity in operations - Commercial transactions of IPv4 addresses - Data centre technologies - Network and DNS operations - Internet governance and regulatory practices - Network and routing security - Content delivery - Internet peering and mobile data exchange Submissions RIPE Meeting attendees are quite sensitive to keeping presentations non-commercial, and product marketing talks are strongly discouraged. Repeated audience feedback shows that the most successful talks focus on operational experience, research results, or case studies. For example, presenters wishing to describe a commercial solution should focus on the underlying technology and not attempt a product demonstration. The RIPE PC accepts proposals for different presentation formats, including plenary session presentations, tutorials, workshops, BoFs (Birds of a Feather sessions) and lightning talks. See the full descriptions of these formats at https://ripe69.ripe.net/submit-topic/presentation-formats/ Presenters who are proposing a panel or BoF are encouraged to include speakers from several (perhaps even competing) companies and/or a neutral facilitator. In addition to presentations selected in advance for the plenary, the RIPE PC also offers several time slots for "lightning talks", which are selected immediately before or during the conference. The following general requirements apply: - Proposals for plenary session presentations, BoFs, panels, workshops and tutorials must be submitted for full consideration no later than 31 August 2014, using the meeting submission system at https://ripe69.ripe.net/submit-topic/guidelines/. Proposals submitted after this date will be considered on a space-available basis. - Lightning talks should also be submitted using the meeting submission system (https://ripe69.ripe.net/submit-topic/submission-form/) and can be submitted just days before the RIPE Meeting starts or even during the meeting week. The allocation of lightning talk slots will be announced in short notice – in some cases on the same day but often one day prior to the relevant session. - Presenters should indicate how much time they will require. See more information on time slot allocations per presentation format at https://ripe69.ripe.net/submit-topic/presentation-formats/. - Proposals for talks will only be considered by the PC if they contain at least draft presentation slides (slides may be updated later on). For panels, proposals must contain a clear description, as well as the names of invited panellists, presenters and moderators. - Due to potential technical issues, it is expected that most, if not all, presenters/panellists will be physically present at the RIPE Meeting. If you have any questions or requests concerning content submissions, please email pc [at] ripe [dot] net. --------------------- -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

2 2

RIPE 69 is coming! Send in your agenda items
by Jaap Akkerhuis 24 Sep '14

24 Sep '14

The subject is the Exec Summary. Yes, it is this time of the year again. Ripe is coming to town. We have a single slot reserved at on Thursday the 6th of November <https://ripe69.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/> and like to see that filled with your contributions. There has been quite some turmoil in DNS land lately, from the policy stuff (iana transition) via gTLD outroll and various options to accomodate CDNs (ALIAS, ANAME etc in the apex) to root zone KSK rollover so I expect that there will be a lot to talk about. Therefore, send you proposals ASAP. jaap

1 0

Root Zone KSK Rollover Operations Workshop (save the date)
by Joe Abley 16 Sep '14

16 Sep '14

Hi all, ICANN will facilitate an open, technical workshop to discuss operational plans for a future root zone KSK rollover, during the upcoming ICANN 51 meeting to be held in Los Angeles in October 2014. The workshop is intended for participants who have a technical, operational perspective and is an opportunity to explore potential options, operational considerations, and other aspects of rolling the root zone KSK. The workshop will be held on Thursday October 16, 2014 at the ICANN meeting venue in Los Angeles. This will be an open event, and remote participation will be available. More details including a tentative agenda, will be made available soon. If you are able to participate, please join the ksk-rollover mailing list at <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ksk-rollover> which will be used to coordinate this workshop, and to function as a venue for technical discussion as this work proceeds in the future. Regards, Joe & Roy & Jakob & Duane & Dan ad-hoc workshop coordinators

1 0

draft minutes from RIPE68
by Jim Reid 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Colleagues, here are the draft minutes from the last WG meeting. Please let me know of any errors or omissions. Thanks.

1 0

Announcing changes to DNSMON
by Vesna Manojlovic 09 Sep '14

09 Sep '14

Dear colleagues, The DNS Monitoring Service (DNSMON) has been providing a comprehensive, objective and up-to-date overview of the quality of various global and regional DNS operators' services since 2003. As announced last year by Kaveh Ranjbar in the RIPE Labs article, "Future of RIPE NCC Technical Services", we are in the process of integrating DNSMON within RIPE Atlas, using RIPE Atlas anchors as vantage points. The beta version of the new DNSMON will be available next week, when we will invite you all to try the new service and provide your feedback. In the meantime, we wanted to let you know about some of the changes in the new DNSMON service: New interactive graphs that will allow you to zoom in on interesting details, such as servers, vantage points, and time intervals. Support of TCP queries. Data delay for non-DNSMON users will not be replicated because the measurements performed by RIPE Atlas anchors for the new DNSMON are public measurements. Therefore, the results will also be publicly available. Server-side generated RRD graphs will not be migrated, as the client-side visualisations provide a comparable replacement. However, the existing service will keep working in parallel and decommissioning plans will be discussed with the community. In the meantime, the graphs and data from the old system will still be available. We will publish a RIPE Labs article with more details when the new service becomes available next week. We’re confident the new DNSMON will continue to meet your needs and hope you'll be pleased with the new features. Please stay tuned for more information. Kind regards, Vesna Manojlovic Senior Community Builder Measurements Community Building RIPE NCC

8 14

127.0.53.53 in logs?
by David Conrad 03 Sep '14

03 Sep '14

Hi, I was wondering if any resolver operators were seeing 127.0.53.53 in log files. For anyone who isn’t aware, seeing that address would suggest a “name collision” (see https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/name-collision-2013-12-06-en if you don’t know what that is). As currently over 300 new generic TLDs have been delegated and there was much ... ‘discussion’ about the risk associated with the delegation of those TLDs, I’d be interested in hearing about anything anyone is seeing related to “name collision". Thanks, -drc

2 1