2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
- Previous message (by thread): 2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): subscribe
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Keith N Mitchell
knm at dial.pipex.com
Wed Jan 22 12:18:02 CET 1997
On Jan 22, 9:45am, Ian Mason wrote: > > I don't think there are any sacred cows for any of these here - > > if we adjust the LINX policy to meet requirements of the root NS > > rather than the other way around, I don't think we break either > > of 1 or 2. I don't think it breaks 3. either, but this requirement > > will go away when we have a route server in any case. > > If we opt for the root NS to have its own AS then there is no barrier to > people offering identical routing policy for the LINX and the NS. If it > shares the LINX AS then it will be impossible to have different policy for > LINX and the NS. So, if there is a possibility that there will ever be a > requirement to have different routing policy for the NS and the LINX it > would seem wise to give the NS its own AS. > > It may be moot in as much as it's probably desireable to achieve 'root > server connectivity quality' for the LINX AS, but the seperate AS for the > root server would preserve some flexibility. I agree, but at the cost of an additional router. Due to the nature of the full routing we need for theses AS(es), a 64Mb router is a requirement eventually anyway, but it is not a LINX budget item at present, and while there have been lots of offers of server hardware for the root NS, there have been none to date of a router. I suggest we make the ASes the same for now, but split them when a clear requirement arises. At that point we will hopefully have a route server box to take over various of the collector functions. Keith
- Previous message (by thread): 2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): subscribe
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]