- dns-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: 2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
by Peter Lothberg 19 Jan '97

19 Jan '97

> > What has been > > discussed in the past at the LINX, and I believe was discussed again > > today, was a root server for "." We think that what would be of most > > benefit to Europe would be a full root name server, including the > > largest domains (.com and .net), and this is what we discussed with > > Paul Vixie and proposed to Jon Postel last year. The .COM and .NET domains are very large, they have many querries, but the . nameservers serves the universe. Suggestion; Separate the . (root) from the next level (.country, .net, .com) servers.. So, instead of putting ONE host on the network behind the router, put TWO, and the second one could handle the second level domains you wish. Maybe there should be a THIRD host to serve the country toplevel domain (.uk in this case) and maybe toplevel for other countries the region. (.nl, .es, etc..) Hosts are cheap, running them with a quality service is more expensive, but the number of users affected by the performance and availiabilty and performace are VERY high... > > > Shared resources has to bee keept as neutral as possible, and having > > > for example a root-name-server behind it's own router attached to a well > > > recogized public exchange point seems to be the best avaliable > > > implementation today. > > > > This is in fact exactly the physical arrangement that we have proposed: > > a root name server on its own class C one hop off the LINX. > > Not from a routing policy point of view - will you put the root > server in a seperate AS, or will connectivity be constrained by > your peering/routing policy ? The nameservers has to be in their own AS, behind their own router(s) and account for traffic to be in the 400kbps in / 700kbps out range and estimate growth to 10% month. So full-duplex FDDI or full-duplex fast Ethernet is a requrement. The peering policy of this as should be something like; Peer with anyone who request to peer. Maybe it even should accept circiuts from those who just want to have good connectivity to the nameservers, but don't care about the particular exchanage point. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I would suggest that once everyone agreed on a workable model that we also implement that for other root namseservers. --Peter

1 0

subscribe
by Jim Dixon 15 Jan '97

15 Jan '97

subscribe <jdd(a)vbc.net>

1 0

Re: 2nd Root Server in Europe
by Marcel Schneider 15 Jan '97

15 Jan '97

On Monday, 13 Jan 1997, Daniel Karrenberg writes: > Dear colleagues, > I have received an informal query from IANA about RIPE's opinion about > the placement of a second root name server in Europe at the LINX > operated by VBCnet. This should be discussed at the next meeting. > Personally I think that placement at the LINX makes good sense because > of current network topology. Is that true ? We currently have ; formerly NIC.NORDU.NET ; . 3600000 NS I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 3600000 A 192.36.148.17 in the north of Europe and according to above proposal a second root name server in the north of Europe, just one hop from one to the other. How about middle and south Europe ? Wouldn't it make sense to have at least one additional NS in these densely populated regions to provide better access times there ? This is just a question, nothing more. > Daniel Marcel Schneider@SWITCH > ----- Begin Included Message ----- >>From jdd(a)avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net Thu Jan 9 11:03:28 1997 > Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:04:48 +0000 (GMT) > From: Jim Dixon <jdd(a)vbc.net> > To: iana(a)iana.org, postel(a)isi.edu > Cc: paul(a)vix.com > Subject: Re: UK root nameserver > Two months ago I wrote to you regarding the possibility of our setting > up a root name server in the UK. To date I have received no reply at > all, other than something from a robot promising a reply from a human > being within ten days; this of course never came. > I have been just now been asked to report back to the board of the UK > Internet Service Providers Association regarding this request. Would > it be possible for someone at IANA to give us some indication of what > your response is likely to be? > On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, Jim Dixon wrote: >> Several days ago one of our engineers talked to Paul Vixie in California >> regarding our setting up a root name server in the United Kingdom. As >> I am sure you are aware, there is only one root server in Europe and >> for many UK networks that server is netwise further from the UK than >> most of the US servers. >> >> We will have a server built to Paul Vixie's recommendations some time >> this week. As he suggests, it will be placed in its own class C on a >> private LAN segment. This will be on a 100 Mbps port on a router with >> a 100 Mbps connection to the LINX, the London Internet Exchange, which >> is the major UK peering point (http://www.linx.net). The LINX is >> actually attracting a significant number of networks from the continent: >> we now have one Dutch and two German members, with EBONE talking about >> joining in December. >> >> This proposal has the endorsement of the UK Internet Service Providers >> Association (http://www.ispa.org.uk), of which I am one of the >> directors. ISPA is more or less equivalent to the CIX in the US. The >> machine will be operated by VBCnet, which is an owner/ member of the >> LINX, and will be, as I said, one hop from the LINX on a 100 Mbps port. >> The LINX and our London PoP are located in Telehouse Europe, which is >> the UK's premier telecommunications centre. Engineering staff are on duty >> 24x7. Telehouse has exceptionally high security, multiply redundant high >> speed telecommunications links, and multiply redundant power supplies. >> >> Should you need any further information or additional material in >> support of this proposal, we will of course be happy to supply it. >> I can be contacted at either of the numbers below, by email, or >> at 011 44 973 737 881 anytime. > - -- > Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net > tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015 > ----- End Included Message -----

1 0

Re: 2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
by gih＠telstra.net 15 Jan '97

15 Jan '97

This was discussed at the IEPG meeting in July and again in December. The issue at the time was to provide advice to IANA as to the potential siting of additional root name servers - the advice so provided was along the lines of siting one server in the UK with a potential system host of LINX and siting a second in Japan, with a potential host of WIDE. The discussion was initiated by Bill Manning and the notes of the Montreal meeting are at http://www.iepg.org Thanks Geoff

1 0

Re: 2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
by Keith Mitchell 14 Jan '97

14 Jan '97

Daniel, I've had a number of discussions with Bill Manning to facilitate this, and hosting of this server was again discusssed and endorsed at the LINX meeting today. However, I am rather surprised to hear of the involvement of VBCnet and ISPA - despite Jim regularly attending LINX meetings and being active in LINX mailing lists, he has not mentioned anything about either of these. Normally the ISPA does not concern itself with technical or infrastructure matters. LINX policy, which was endorsed at the two recent IEPG meetings, is that the proposed root server would be in the LINX neutral AS rather than that of any particular member - clearly we welcome VBC's offer of resources, but I am not sure the other LINX members would be quite so supportive of this if they felt one member was being a chance they also might also want. With this qualification LINX remains highly supportive of this proposal and I'll do my best to facilitate it. I will be at the RIPE meeting next Mon and Tue, and hope Jim will be there to clarify any confusion. Keith Mitchell Chairman London InterNet Exchange keith(a)linx.org PO Box 51 Stamford, PE9 2WF United Kingdom Phone: +44 7000 783797 (fax 783798) Mobile: +44 385 346152 > >To: dns-wg(a)ripe.net > >Cc: RIPE WG Chairpeople <wg-chairs(a)ripe.net> > >Subject: 2nd Root Server in Europe > >From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg(a)ripe.net> > > >I have received an informal query from IANA about RIPE's opinion about > >the placement of a second root name server in Europe at the LINX > >operated by VBCnet. This should be discussed at the next meeting. > >Personally I think that placement at the LINX makes good sense because > >of current network topology. > >On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, Jim Dixon wrote: > > >> We will have a server built to Paul Vixie's recommendations some time > >> this week. As he suggests, it will be placed in its own class C on a > >> private LAN segment. This will be on a 100 Mbps port on a router with > >> a 100 Mbps connection to the LINX, the London Internet Exchange, which > >> is the major UK peering point (http://www.linx.net). The LINX is > >> actually attracting a significant number of networks from the continent: > >> we now have one Dutch and two German members, with EBONE talking about > >> joining in December. > >> > >> This proposal has the endorsement of the UK Internet Service Providers > >> Association (http://www.ispa.org.uk), of which I am one of the > >> directors. ISPA is more or less equivalent to the CIX in the US. The > >> machine will be operated by VBCnet, which is an owner/ member of the > >> LINX, and will be, as I said, one hop from the LINX on a 100 Mbps port.

4 7

Re: 2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)
by Peter Lothberg 14 Jan '97

14 Jan '97

> LINX policy, which was endorsed at the two recent IEPG meetings, is > that the proposed root server would be in the LINX neutral AS This is was was discussed at the IEPG meeting, and the concensus was that "common resources" should be attached to public exchange points trough a dedicated router in a neutral way. Shared resources has to bee keept as neutral as possible, and having for example a root-name-server behind it's own router attached to a well recogized public exchange point seems to be the best avaliable implementation today. Thus all ISP's present at that echange point could peer, regardless of their peering policies to other ISP's and as there is no other service than the nameserver is behind that router, and I'm sure all of them (the ISP's peering) will give transit for the prefix used by the nameserver to other parts of the network. --Peter

4 4

2nd Root Server in Europe
by Daniel Karrenberg 13 Jan '97

13 Jan '97

Dear colleagues, I have received an informal query from IANA about RIPE's opinion about the placement of a second root name server in Europe at the LINX operated by VBCnet. This should be discussed at the next meeting. Personally I think that placement at the LINX makes good sense because of current network topology. Daniel ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From jdd(a)avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net Thu Jan 9 11:03:28 1997 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:04:48 +0000 (GMT) From: Jim Dixon <jdd(a)vbc.net> To: iana(a)iana.org, postel(a)isi.edu Cc: paul(a)vix.com Subject: Re: UK root nameserver Two months ago I wrote to you regarding the possibility of our setting up a root name server in the UK. To date I have received no reply at all, other than something from a robot promising a reply from a human being within ten days; this of course never came. I have been just now been asked to report back to the board of the UK Internet Service Providers Association regarding this request. Would it be possible for someone at IANA to give us some indication of what your response is likely to be? On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, Jim Dixon wrote: > Several days ago one of our engineers talked to Paul Vixie in California > regarding our setting up a root name server in the United Kingdom. As > I am sure you are aware, there is only one root server in Europe and > for many UK networks that server is netwise further from the UK than > most of the US servers. > > We will have a server built to Paul Vixie's recommendations some time > this week. As he suggests, it will be placed in its own class C on a > private LAN segment. This will be on a 100 Mbps port on a router with > a 100 Mbps connection to the LINX, the London Internet Exchange, which > is the major UK peering point (http://www.linx.net). The LINX is > actually attracting a significant number of networks from the continent: > we now have one Dutch and two German members, with EBONE talking about > joining in December. > > This proposal has the endorsement of the UK Internet Service Providers > Association (http://www.ispa.org.uk), of which I am one of the > directors. ISPA is more or less equivalent to the CIX in the US. The > machine will be operated by VBCnet, which is an owner/ member of the > LINX, and will be, as I said, one hop from the LINX on a 100 Mbps port. > The LINX and our London PoP are located in Telehouse Europe, which is > the UK's premier telecommunications centre. Engineering staff are on duty > 24x7. Telehouse has exceptionally high security, multiply redundant high > speed telecommunications links, and multiply redundant power supplies. > > Should you need any further information or additional material in > support of this proposal, we will of course be happy to supply it. > I can be contacted at either of the numbers below, by email, or > at 011 44 973 737 881 anytime. - -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015 ----- End Included Message -----

1 0

Problems with root-servers
by dns＠chasqui.rcp.net.pe 10 Jan '97

10 Jan '97

Hi On the last days we check my DNS with doc and it report these problems DIGERR (UNKNOWN) : dig @c.root-servers.net. for NS of pe. failed Please could you give me an advise how i can correct this problem ? Thank you

2 1

Misrepresentation on 'Internet Domain Name Survey'
by shaw 29 Nov '96

29 Nov '96

It has come to our attention that a Mr Daniel Chun has sent an "Internet Domain Name Survey" (shown below) requesting replies to an ITU (International Telecommunication Union) email account. Please note the following: 1. The 'Internet Domain Name Survey' from Mr. Chun has absolutely nothing to do with the ITU. 2. Mr Chun is not an employee of the ITU nor is there any related ITU 'study group'. 3. His account is one of about 6,000 external accounts granted to people around the world working in the telecommunications field to track ITU activities and assist interworking with us. 4. We consider this an abuse of his ITU account. 5. His account has been immediately terminated. I apologize for any confusion this has created. I don't know to who he has sent this solicitation but feel free to forward this note on to others. Robert Shaw ITU Geneva, Switzerland ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Return-Path: <dchun(a)mailhub.hkstar.com> Received: from callandor.cybercash.com (callandor1.cybercash.com) by cybercash.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26397; Thu, 28 Nov 96 22:45:12 EST Received: by callandor.cybercash.com; id WAA27808; Thu, 28 Nov 1996 22:41:22 -0500 Received: from mailhub.hkstar.com(202.82.0.38) by callandor.cybercash.com via smap (3.2) id xma027796; Thu, 28 Nov 96 22:41:15 -0500 Received: from INTERNIX1.DOMAIN (neptune182.hkstar.com [202.82.49.182]) by mailhub.hkstar.com (8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id LAA26429; Fri, 29 Nov 1996 11:19:46 +0800 (HKT) Message-Id: <199611290319.LAA26429(a)mailhub.hkstar.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is <dchun(a)mail.hkstar.com> From: daniel.chun(a)itu.ch To: "Internet Domain Name Survey" <daniel.chun(a)itu.ch> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 11:16:24 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Domain Name Survey Reply-To: daniel.chun(a)itu.ch X-Confirm-Reading-To: daniel.chun(a)itu.ch X-Pmrqc: 1 Return-Receipt-To: daniel.chun(a)itu.ch Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Nov 29, 1996 Domain Study Group Dear Domain Owner and Administrator, This is not a junk e-mail, you receive this e-mail because you have been carefully selected from InterNIC's WHOIS database to respond to a survey conducted by a voluntary study group in parallel with various initiatives from bodies including International Telecommunications Union (ITU), Internet Society (ISOC) and Internet Assigned Numbers Association (IANA). Due to the phenomenal growth of the Internet, the authorities have acknowledged the high demand for domain names. In September 1996 alone, InterNIC has received 75,213 applications for registering for second level domain names including .COM .NET .ORG .GOV and .EDU In the Internet universe, the gold rush for domain names is happening, there are individuals speculating domain names and there are various ISPs or individuals involving themselves in trading and brokering domain names. Examples of such can be found in the following sites: www.domainmart.com www.bestdomain.com www.domaindealers.com Our study group has found that typically, these services charges the Domain Owners a one-time sign up fee of US$10-$100 and then they charge a commission of 5%-25% of the transaction value of the domain name. This amount could be very high if the domain name transaction involves high stake (eg. For a sale value of US$25,000 10% commission will be US$ 2,500). Furthermore, we also observed that the charges for the services provided are not necessarily equitable to the cost of delivering the service. In another words, the service delivered for a US$500 transaction and a US$25,000 is the same. In light of the situation, this study group would like to conduct a survey which require you to reply to this e-mail. Please put a cross (eg. X) in the underlined area to indicate your response. 1. Are you one of the following ? __ Domain owner __ Domain administrator (eg. technical, billing, administrative contact) 2. Will you offer your Domain for sale ? __ Yes __ No __ Depends on Sale Value 3. What price do you think your Domain is worth ? __ Priceless __ USD 0 < P < USD 1,000 __ USD 1,000 < P < USD 5,000 __ USD 5,000 < P < USD 10,000 __ USD 10,000 < P 3) How will you go about selling your Domain ? __ Through Domain Brokers __ Personal Selling __ Directory Services (listing, public forum) If this study group propose a Directory Service to the authorities to provide a forum, similar to a database service (eg. InterNIC's WHOIS database) for Domain Names on non-profit making nature. This will help promote the value of domain names, and promote growth in the use of domain names and yet indirectly imposing control mechanism to the brokering of domain names by establishing an open forum. This will promoting the value of transacting domains without involving in the transaction itself thereby collecting high commission. The cost of providing the service will be compensated by a one-time nominal charge to fund the ongoing research, development and administration of the web site and services. 4. What price level do you as a Domain Owner and Administrator do you believe is acceptable (For your information, InterNIC currently charges US$ 50 one-time fee for domain registration) __ US$ 5 - US$ 10 __ US$ 11 - US$ 15 __ US$ 16 - US$ 20 __ US$ 21 - US$ 25 __ US$ 25 - US$ 30 5. What service level do you see as important for this Directory Services __ Web User Interface and Functionality __ Bandwidth of the Directory Service __ Effectiveness of selling your Domain __ Please suggest _____________________________________ 6) Will you be willing to pay by credit card ? __ Yes __ No 7) If answer to 6 is Yes, Which method of giving your card details do you prefer ? __ by Internet email __ by Internet Commerce __ by fax __ by ordinary mail 8) If No, what other methods do you prefer in settling payment for the service? __ by cheque __ by wire transfer __ Others, please suggest ___________________________________ We dearly appreciate you taking time to complete this survey, we will anticipate to collect most of these responses before Christmas. And we will forward any subsequent compilation of the survey results probably in January 1997. If there is any other comments, please forward it to my address at ITU. Cordially, Daniel Chun Research Assistant Internet: daniel.chun(a)itu.ch

1 0

New Document available: RIPE-152
by RIPE NCC Document Annoucement Service 18 Nov '96

18 Nov '96

New/Revised RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A revised/new document is available from the RIPE document store. Ref: ripe-152 Title: Charging by Local Internet Registries Author: M. Norris, D. Karrenberg Date: 22 Apr 1996 Accessing the RIPE document store --------------------------------- You can access the RIPE document store via the World Wide Web; RIPE-152 is not available from the WWW at this moment, but will be soon, at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-152.html The RIPE document store is also available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The full filenames of the new documents on the FTP-server are: ripe/docs/ripe-152.ps for the PostScript version ripe/docs/ripe-152.txt for the plain text version Documents can also be retrieved from the RIPE document store using a mail server program. For more information on how to use the program, send email to <mail-server(a)ripe.net> with "send HELP" in the body text.

1 0