Re: Concern about gTLD servers in India

[Jonathan Lassoff <jof () thejof com>]

On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Bill Woodcock <woody () pch net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
>
> On Mar 10, 2012, at 8:05 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > Sure, if you can find a datacenter that's capable of handling all the
> > traffic, and has staff who are able to provide efficient remote hands for
> > huge racks of extremely powerful servers .
>
> Honestly, we haven't even gotten that far when we've offered to deploy servers (for instance for domains like .IN) 
> inside India.  The bribes that were requested in exchange for giving us permission to deploy a free service were, uh, 
> both prohibitive and ludicrous in their enormity.

This.

This and the import duties on hardware and the requirement for
licensing to operate as an "ISP" makes placing even a modest
deployment a lot more work compared to deploying in other neighboring
countries.

I would presume that Verisign decided that it just wasn't worth the
effort to deploy into India.
It obviously has a gigantic user base for which getting into local
ISPs and IXPs would probably save on transit costs.

Perhaps if some local root operators could donate some
space/power/connectivity, Verisign-grs could colocate a gTLD cluster
there?

Cheers,
jof