Dear John, Bill and all, On 17/03/17 19:31 , John Curran wrote: > On 17 Mar 2017, at 2:17 PM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:14 PM, John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: >> >>> See previous reply. The data was both correctly formatted and signed, >>> so the agreed integrity checks passed. >>> >> Ah, okay. So it wasn't bad counts as originally reported but no data with >> counts that confirmed no data. Thanks for the clarification! > > Bill - > > Glad to help (and apologies for the information coming out in pieces – > we’ve opted to go with updates as we learn more rather than some for > comprehensive but less timely report.)
We have been slow to clarify this from the RIPE NCC end, for which I apologize. As was already mentioned by Mark and John in previous messages in this thread, the initial report from the RIPE NCC wasn't complete, which has lead to unnecessary confusion. A follow up message with additional detail was sent to the RIPE NCC DNS working group list earlier today: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/dns-wg/2017-March/003401.html We hope that this clarifies matters sufficiently. Kind regards, Romeo Zwart RIPE NCC