A proposal ... not set in stone, but I do try to follow these rules.
Last updated Mon Apr  8 15:31:28 CDT 1996

These are the requirements that *I* typically require for a new
server.  Other servers will have their own requirements, which may or
may not be similar to mine.

Note that piglet.cc.utexas.edu is no longer in a good position to
route other IRC servers (i.e. to be a hub.)  Therefore, we are not
linking in any new servers, and therefore this entire document really
doesn't mean anything ... but you may wish to consider it, as other
servers may have similar requirements ...

- A full T1 network connection or better is the bare minimum.
  Multiple T1's or a faster connection are typically the norm of new
  servers.

- The IRC server's existance must be permitted by the administration
  of the machine and the network that it's sitting on.  This kind of
  goes without saying ...

- The persons responsible for running the server must be reasonably
  knowledgable about IRC and Unix.  They should be willing and able to
  answer most user questions that they encounter regarding IRC.

- The IRC server doesn't need a terribly fast machine, but it does
  need to be reasonably reliable and to not ever get totally bogged
  down.  A Sparcstation 1+ with 32 megs of ram can make a decent IRC
  server if it's dedicated.  If it's not dedicated, you'll need a faster
  machine, and more RAM.

  PC's typically don't make great IRC servers, especially when they're
  running Linux.  Free/NetBSD typically works better for an IRC server, but
  even so, PC's aren't the platform of choice for an IRC server.

- Running a server requires that the rest of the IRC network put a lot
  of trust in you.  People who are known not to be trustworthy or with a
  history of not acting in the best interests of the `IRC net' will
  typically be denied server links.

- New servers will be L: lined - meaning that it cannot link in other
  servers until such time as it is deemed that the server and it's
  administration are ready for such a load.

- New servers should not be compiled in debug mode, and should consider
  enabling LOCAL_KILL_ONLY.

- As far as bots go, the server can allow or disallow bots as it sees
  fit.  But, certain rules should be followed -

  - They should not allow more than one bot per person.
  - The admins of the server should follow their own bot rules - if they
    ban all bots, they should not be running their own bots.
  - Not every domain can have it's own IRC server.  Therefore, if you allow
    bots from the local domain, I feel you should also allow bots from your
    net-neighbors, even from competing ISP's, and they should be subject to
    the same rules as local bots.
  - Your policies should be enforced.

  Note that these are *my* views, and the admins of other servers
  may or may not agree.  But following these rules will make me more
  inclined to consider linking your server ...

Each server puts a certain load on the IRC network, so we need to make
certain that all servers are in fact beneficial to the IRC network as
a whole.  Possibly the most important factor in determining if an IRC
server is needed is the local userbase, how many local users are on
IRC, typically averaged over a week.

While bots are typically counted in these measurements, it's assumed
that the majority of these users are in fact active humans.  If the
site runs large numbers of bots, these bots will be subtracted from
the average, and may actually be seen as a reason to deny links to
this site.

Currently, recent (and old) usage stats are available via anonymous
ftp from ftp.comco.com in the directory /pub/irc/stats

Currently, the cutoff figure I use for average userbase needed for a
new server is 30 clients for an educational institution, and 35 for
other organizations, typically Internet Service Providers.  These
numbers aren't set in stone, but they are general guidelines.  For
purposes of this determination, I usually go by the average number of
`non-duplicated' userids on IRC from this domain.

I will occasionally link new server with (somewhat) lower numbers of
users if some of the following are true :

  - they are in a particularly good network location (T3, multi-homed, etc.)

  - the administration appears to really know what they're doing, and
    really appears to be looking out for the benefit of the IRC network as
    a whole.  This usually requires that I know them personally.

  - There are no IRC servers in their network-area.  This does not
    mean I will link a server just because that state/city doesn't have a
    server, as networks typically don't care about state lines.

Of course, if I do link a server with a low local userbase, I expect
them to make up for it by handling a lot of remote clients ...
  
If a site has certain problems, I will be reluctant to link a server
there.  Possible problems include :

   - clonebotters from that site.

   - just lots of bots in general, especially if their numbers
     approcaches/exceeds the number of humans, or if they are being run
     by the admins/operators of the new server.

   - the potential IRC admins or any of their `ircops' have a history
     of causing IRC `problems' (clonebotting, flooding, nick colliding,
     channel takeovers, harassment, etc.)

   - lax security.  IRC servers typically attract crackers like a magnet.

   - Other established IRC servers that are very close network-wise,
     that are willing to handle your local clients.

These numbers assume that your server will be willing to accept
connections from other nearby (net-wise) sites, especially those
without servers, even if these sites are competitors (in the case of
ISP's.)  Very few ISP's (right now, Netcom is the only one) have
enough users to justify an IRC server just for them.

If after a short period of operation, your server doesn't have an
average, of, say 100 users on it at any given time, the server links
will be reconsidered ... each server slows the network by a small
amount, and if the server doesn't have enogh users to justify it's own
existance, it should be removed.  Same goes for servers that turn out 
to be unreliable, as they hurt the entire net.

For an already existing server, I don't look so much at local userbase
as I do at how many clients it handles, on the average.  If it doesn't
average at least 100 clients, then it probably should be removed.

Basically, due to the way IRC works, we need a few big servers instead
of a bunch of little ones.  If we let every site that wants a server
run one (lots of people just want to be ircops, and then lots of sites
just want one for the `prestige' it may bring them, and lots of people
want to run one so they have a place to put their bots) then IRC
wouldn't work at all.  Hopefully the next version of ircd will not
have this restriction ... but currently we're stuck with this
limitation, and we have to limit the number of servers on the net ...

 - Doug McLaren, dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu