2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)

> On the other hand, following recommendations to us, our intention is
> to put a root name server in a class C by itself.  There has been a 
> lot of discussion in this area, and this is what I understand to be
> the recommended policy.   We don't care what AS this class C is in;
> on the whole we would probably prefer that it not be in one of our
> ASs.

At the risk of AOL-ism, I too prefer the consensus agreement reached
by all the LINX members who were at the AGM. Just because all LINX
members currently peer with VBC, this does not mean that new members
will be allowed to, want to, or that current members will continue
to be allowed to / continue to want to.

As I understand it, the latest IETF & IEPG proposals suggest that
the servers should be at exchange points transitted by several
people and run in a neutral manner (apologies if this a misrepresentation),
not transitted by a single member, albeit from a point close to an
IXP.

As far as I know the LINX proposal has always been on the table
modulo the issue of whether .com etc. where secondaried there
as well as '.' and the transit bandwidth implications thereof.

Alex Bligh
Xara Networks