nanog mailing list archives

RE: WCCP talk..


From: "Christian Kuhtz" <ck () adsu bellsouth com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 19:55:59 -0500

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 11:05:00PM -0500, alex () nac net wrote:
That I can accept.

But, I still have one fundamental argument, which is to ensure
true and
absolute reliability, a machine should not be verifying its own
health.

My other concern is that now that it is licensable, will the other
cache
manufacturers do it properly also?

If cisco has any brains left, they will certify WCCP operation in a
series of testsuites before they let anyone claim that it is WCCP.

Do you have a link or similar that shows that WCCP is now licensable
?

It has not been announced yet.

Does any know of any other cache manufacturers that currently
supports
WCCP ?

WCCP licensing is, AFAIK, not yet available.

Cheers,
Chris

- --
Christian Kuhtz <ck () adsu bellsouth com> -wk     ck () gnu org -hm
Sr. Network Architect, BellSouth Corp., Advanced Data Services
NOTE: "We speak PGP: key available at well-known key servers."
            "Turnaucka's Law: The attention span of a computer 
             is only as long as its electrical cord."  
                                         -- /usr/games/fortune
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.0 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBNkoyDIRXnO1Cm58sEQIU6gCg7tl2LocA0LkLA1TVK8IUiECjY8sAniD8
drSK+t1Wzev2X7i53RyuzjVZ
=1CYs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Current thread: