At 21:20 3/04/98 +1000, you wrote:
>> >   3.1. Host population.  A server's location on the network should be
>> >   such that it has a low IP hop count to a high number of end hosts.
>> >   Duplication of service should be avoided, such that any given set of
>> >   end hosts needs to have a low IP hop count to at most one authority
>> >   server for any given zone.
>> 
>> a.root-servers.net
>> b.root-servers.net
>> c.root-servers.net
>> 
>> I'd like to see if these servers comply with your reading o the section you
>> post avove.
>
>I'm not going to bother posting the traceroutes - I'm sure everyone on
>this list is capiable of doing them for themselves.

Because if you post on public record that the "root servers" you claim are
"gods" actually exceed seven hops, which is the limit of your to me, then
your quoting of the paragraph above becomes a mute point.

Thanks for obliging and yet again, helping AURSC show it's not only a fully
RFC2010 complient network, but also closer than those in the United States.

Support the Australian Brand :)

>What they do show is that none of these three name servers are located at
>the same locations, or even on the same networks, and thus yes, they
>do follow "duplication of service should be avoided" as stated above - 
>unlike the AURSC servers.

Hang on a sec, AURSC has servers in more than one location.  AURSC houses
two colocated RSs on the same subnet for load and redundancy. It does not
in any way affect the operation of the resources, nor does it depleat the
fact that they are stable.

>If you were refering to the hop counts, a and b are 10/11 hops away - not
>necessarily that close, but not that far away either, especially seeing the

I see, so 10/11 hops is acceptable and 7 is not.  Thanks Scott.

>majority of the hops are >>50Mbps links.

And this means what?  Are you telling me your servers are going to consum
more than 50 MBps of data doing DNS lookups?  If so, that's not problem.
Three of the Affiliated AURSC servers are located on OC12 networks in the
United States.

That's a little more than 50 Mbps but hell, I'm not counting.

If you require this level of bandwidth and it can be shown that AURSCs
local servers just can't hack it (and this is unlikely because of the round
robin approach used by DNS) then you can download the world.ca file and use
only the overseas servers.

I can't help it if the charging mechanism Telstra use in this country
prohibits sensible development of the Internet, unlike in the United States.

But again, your point is mute.

Thanks for speaking.  I'm pleased to see someone actually is concerned, but
it's a shame you don't pop over and visit me and show me how I should
really do it.  After all - like all RSs - volunteers are always welcome.



THE DOMAIN NAME HANDBOOK                   http://www.domainhandbook.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The advice offered in this email is not considered professional advice,
or it would be accompanied by an invoice. No permission is granted for 
republication of comments, without written consent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business Development, Technology Domain Registration and Network Advisory
Telstra Convey Member			  AURSC    http://www.aursc.ah.net
Adam Todd                                 Personal http://adamtodd.ah.net  
at§aus  or  at@ah.net				   http://adam.says.sheesh
Phone +61 2 9729 0565                     Network  http://www.ah.net
AU Internet News  		http://www.ah.net/lists/lwgate/INTERNET/
AU Internet User Mail List	http://www.ah.net/lists/lwgate/OZ-USER/