2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
Ian Mason Ian.Mason at zoo.co.uk
Wed Jan 22 10:45:44 CET 1997
At 13:08 20/01/97 +0000, Keith N Mitchell wrote: [snip] > 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.
[ dns-wg Archives ]