2nd Root Server in Europe

  > Piet Beertema <Piet.Beertema at cwi.nl> writes:
  >     The location of that server is not a technical issue, it's a political 
  > one.
  > True. And it will stay that way on this continent, ....

The RIPE DNS WG met and there was consensus that root servers should be
connected through a dedicated address prefix and AS.  Connectivity of
the KTH based server will be re-engineered like this.  The LINX based
server will be set up like this.  Further there was consensus that we
should move *towards* a situation where the RIPE NCC is responsible for
operating all root servers in the European region under the guidance
RIPE and funded as an NCC core activity.  It fits the principles for
such activities extremely well (see below).  It is important to note
that while the NCC will have the operational responsibility this does
not exclude interested parties to contribute to nameserver operation in
any way.  To the contrary the efforts of individuals and organisations
like KTH, NORDUNET, LINX and VBCnet are very welcome and essential for
reliable operation of the root nameservers. 

Given those two design decisions, root servers are not so closely bound
to their location and can be moved around the network topology with
relative ease as topology changes and other engineering parameters
suggest. 

Although I am alightly biased in the RIPE NCC matter ;-) I think that
this consensus both very sensible and quite solid. 


Daniel


Principles for NCC Activities 

The RIPE NCC performs activities for the benefit of the Internet service
provider s (ISPs) in Europe and the surrounding areas; primarily
activities that the ISPs need to organise as a group, although they may
be competing with each other in other areas. 

The RIPE NCC must therefore observe strict neutrality and impartiality
with respect to individual service providers.  In particular it refrains
from activities that are clearly in the domain of the ISPs themselves. 

Activities are defined, performed, discussed and evaluated in an open
manner.  Results of activities such as software tools are made available
to the public.  Budgets as well as actual income and expenditure are
published.  Individual data will be kept in confidence where required. 
For example the amounts of address space allocated and assigned are
published as are database entries of individual assignments including
the relevant contact data; however the information supporting individual
assignment requests is kept in strict confidence. 

While an activity may result in services being provided to an individual
ISP, performing the activity as a whole must benefit the European ISPs
as a group.  For example address space registration services are
provided to ISPs individually, but the activity as such benefits all
ISPs by distributing address space according to common standards as well
as maintaining a neutral and accessible registry.