nanog mailing list archives
Re: topological closeness....
From: Mike Trest <trest () atmnet net>
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 17:13:55 -0700
Vadim Antonov wrote:
Cacheing appears to be the only sane way to distribute load. You always know where the closest cacheing server is. Now, there's a problem with coherency, but at least it can be done w/o magic.
Discovering the topology of a group of CACHE servers also needs some clarification. Typically, you only know your internal cache servers. There is a strong international focus on this topic. However, I cannot see how these can be of any "general public" value since a provider would construct a cache to benefit internal customers. My question remains, is this value to our customers and consequent reduction in extrnal traffic sufficient to justify the effort? The research says yes. What about actual experience in a real network? ..mike.. Mike Trest, ATMNET Voice: 619 643-1805 5440 Morehouse Drive Fax: 619 643-1901 San Diego, CA 92121 Pager: 619 960-9070 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- topological closeness.... Mike O'Dell (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Dean Gaudet (May 18)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: topological closeness.... Vadim Antonov (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Randy Bush (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Mike O'Dell (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Paul A Vixie (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Mike Trest (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Geoff Huston (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... George Herbert (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Michael Dillon (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Sanjay Dani (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Matt Zimmerman (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... David R. Conrad (May 15)
- Re: topological closeness.... Vadim Antonov (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Michael Dillon (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Vadim Antonov (May 13)
- Re: topological closeness.... Vadim Antonov (May 13)
(Thread continues...)