[LINK] Need for an Australian Root Server ?

[Adam Todd]

>I'd agree with Glenn. APNIC (who operate the current root server in the
>region, hosted in Japan) considers this issue from time to time. The issue
>is to decide if the Asia-Pacific *region* needs another server, and what
>the connectivity is in the region, not Australia, which is only a small part
>of regional traffic flow.

That's actually not so easy to decide.

You see the URP packet is only able to return 13 root server records in a 
single packet.  Long history here.  Lost of documentation around.

This is why IRSC has cluster members who provide geographically diverse Roots.

We've got 8 Roots in Australia right now, there are 6 in Europe and more 
than a dozen in the USA.  They can't all be listed in the one hints because 
it does cause problems, so clustering is really useful.  It also means TLDs 
that aren't suitable due to local laws can be removed :)

>Root servers do not loadshare by any IP-routing smart method. If you host one
>then your global connectivity matters. Right now, global connectivity to
>Australia isn't neccessarily good in either reachability, delay or bandwidth
>in this respect.

Nope, not really. There aren't REALLY that many root requests.  Think about 
it, 300 odd TLD's.  TTLs of around 7 days.  How much traffic is that?  Not 
a lot.

>Maybe we'll have one. Maybe it'll be Hong Kong, or Singapore, or Korea. But
>it won't be for domestic reasons: it will be regional, traffic ones.

Traffic doesn't really play a part.  It will be for domestic reasons.  It 
already is.