[32445] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Down under NANOG: Telstra problems and root servers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Tue Nov 21 20:04:09 2000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Message-Id: <200011220056.AAA31099@vacation.karoshi.com>
To: chris@connect.com.au (Chris Chaundy)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:56:46 +0000 (UCT)
Cc: sean@donelan.com (Sean Donelan), nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001122111922.607B-100000@anakie.off.connect.com.au> from "Chris Chaundy" at Nov 22, 2000 11:26:03 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> On 21 Nov 2000, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> > So, if a root server was placed in Australia, to whom's network should
> > it be attached. Would OPTUS and Telstra cooperate and jointly provide
> > connectivity and diversity? Or is the most connected place in the
> > asia-pacific region still the west coast of the US?
Depends. Japan & HongKong are pretty well connected and there are a
number of other reasonably well connected places in SEA.
And the past rule set seemed to call out for root servers
to be placed "one hop off a public exchange" and run by a
neutral party. Hence "M" is run by the Wide project off NSPIXP-n
and "K" is run by RIPE off LINX.
One might expect that -IF- a server was to become available and
Oz was to actually acceed to hosting a server, that it would be
one hop off an exchange, say WAIX or SYD-BONE and run by... say
APNIC. In the past, Telstra has not been willing to host a root server.
--bill
