[151084] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Concern about gTLD servers in India
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Sat Mar 10 22:54:14 2012
In-Reply-To: <CAHsqw9sxxGT_ATgxOO_S2iefZAioAKHre-UpPUqbgnLevZVKzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 09:23:17 +0530
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Lassoff <jof@thejof.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
You mean you haven't then immediately heard the "we are a developing
country, please provide it free" story?
On 3/11/12, Jonathan Lassoff <jof@thejof.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>>
>> On Mar 10, 2012, at 8:05 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>>> Sure, if you can find a datacenter that's capable of handling all the
>>> traffic, and has staff who are able to provide efficient remote hands f=
or
>>> huge racks of extremely powerful servers .
>>
>> Honestly, we haven't even gotten that far when we've offered to deploy
>> servers (for instance for domains like .IN) inside India. =C2=A0The brib=
es that
>> were requested in exchange for giving us permission to deploy a free
>> service were, uh, both prohibitive and ludicrous in their enormity.
>
> This.
>
> This and the import duties on hardware and the requirement for
> licensing to operate as an "ISP" makes placing even a modest
> deployment a lot more work compared to deploying in other neighboring
> countries.
>
> I would presume that Verisign decided that it just wasn't worth the
> effort to deploy into India.
> It obviously has a gigantic user base for which getting into local
> ISPs and IXPs would probably save on transit costs.
>
> Perhaps if some local root operators could donate some
> space/power/connectivity, Verisign-grs could colocate a gTLD cluster
> there?
>
> Cheers,
> jof
>
>
--=20
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
