On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Keith Mitchell wrote:
Neither the LINX nor ISPA is particularly technical.
If the LINX is not technical, how come we are running a sucessful exchange point ?
Is this worth going into? Yes we cooperate in operating a successful exchange point at the LINX. But the LINX is not a centre for new ideas; I personally would prefer that it was.
The last time this was discussed at the LINX, the conclusion was that the LINX itself would not take any action until the LINX had hired and trained a systems engineer, if then. You said this yourself, Keith. As I recall, there was a vague suggestion that some action might be initiated in six months.
There have been some developments on this subject to further discussions with ISI - the situation has changed.
So I understand. However, to make things clear, your discussion with Bill Manning followed our approach to IANA by quite some time.
This is a mis-representation of Demon's position at yesterday's meeting that you did not attend - their action is co-operative rather than unilateral. I am sure Demon will correct whichever of us they feel is mis-representing them.
I stand ready to be chastised ;-)
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.
We are not proposing to put up a minimal root name server; frankly, I can't see any purpose in minimizing the name server's scope. We believe that what is needed is a full-blown name server.
I disagree, but let's debate this in the relevant forums first, and not go off and do our thing.
We would appear to be in the relevant forums. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015