[48550] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@karoshi.com)
Thu Jun 6 23:20:46 2002
From: bmanning@karoshi.com
To: john@sackheads.org (John Payne)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 03:17:51 +0000 (UCT)
Cc: bmanning@karoshi.com, smb@research.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin),
dani@intelideas.com (Daniel Concepcion),
neil@COLT.NET (Neil J. McRae), joao@ripe.net (Joao Luis Silva Damas),
randy@psg.com (Randy Bush), ddiaz@ripe.net (Daniel Diaz),
routing-wg@ripe.net, lir-wg@ripe.net, nanog@merit.edu,
apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net
In-Reply-To: <20020607025203.GK74005@haybaler.sackheads.org> from "John Payne" at Jun 06, 2002 07:52:03 PM
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 07:53:49PM +0000, bmanning@karoshi.com wrote:
> ...
> > > I don't know of any official requirements. But RFCs 2182 and 2870
> > > offer good guidance. (Some of 2870 is root zone-specific, but most of
> > > it would apply to a ccTLD server.)
> > >
> > > --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
> >
> > It is perhaps instructive to note that when RFC 2870 was written, (most of)
> > the roots also hosted COM,NET,ORG. Considered properly, RFC 2870 is
> > more targeted toward gTLD servers. ccTLDs have a moderately different
> > focus, while root servers are distinct from either in their requirements.
>
> So how does the operation of gTLD servers differ from ccTLD servers, other
> than perhaps more focus on geographical diversity?
>
number and distributions of registrations, legacy considerations
that may reflect on legal issues, local policy issues
that off the top of my head.
.com vs .um -- for example.
--bill
