This is an old revision of the document!
ns1 atlanta, GA ns2 hanover, NJ ns3 richardson, TX ns4 freemont, CA ns5 london, UK ns6 frankfurt ns7 bengaluru
optimum for us coverage ns1,ns4
Yes, selecting based on target areas makes sense. Here's how I'd approach it based on different scenarios:
US-focused operations: - ns4 (Fremont) - West Coast - ns1 (Atlanta) - East Coast Perfect 2-server minimum setup for US coverage
US + Europe operations: - ns4 (Fremont) - West Coast US - ns1 (Atlanta) - East Coast US - ns6 (Frankfurt) - Central Europe Good 3-server setup covering both continents
Global operations: - ns4 (Fremont) - West Coast US & Pacific - ns1 (Atlanta) - East Coast US - ns6 (Frankfurt) - Europe - ns7 (Bengaluru) - Asia/India Optimal 4-server setup for global coverage
The other servers (Hanover, Richardson, London) become less critical because: - Hanover overlaps with Atlanta - Richardson overlaps with both US coasts - London is less optimal than Frankfurt for Europe
This approach maximizes coverage while keeping the nameserver count manageable.