Topological Motivation for draft-ohta-root-servers-01.txt?

[Steve Mattson <hobbes@engin.umich.edu>]

Hello everyone,

Now that things have settled down a bit, I'd like to ask a question 
about a different aspect of the shared root server debate.  I believe 
that draft-ohta-root-servers-01.txt is the latest version of that i-d.

Upon reading it, and previous versions of same, I have noticed the
repeated country-specific references as motivation for the draft.
However, it appears that the operational changes proposed in the
draft have very little to do with national borders but instead with
network topology issues involving adjacent AS's and BGP routing.
It would appear that the advantages of the changes proposed in the
draft would benefit any group with sufficient internal infrastructure
to support management of an instance of a shared root server, without
regard to the physical or political location of the equipment.

I believe that a reworded motivation section of this draft based solely 
on network topology concerns would allow for a debate centered on the 
issue at hand.  This would allow the draft to proceed without having to 
address what is "internationally fair" or how to determine an evolving 
weight factor for the default set of root servers which one overrides 
selectively within one's "local" Internet.  At the very least a statement 
could be added to this i-d which specifically declared the determination 
of the default set of root servers, or the default scope of those root 
server addresses not otherwise overridden, as being beyond the scope of 
the draft.

Apologies if I've only added to the current confusion,

Steve Mattson