Re: Some sugestions.

Travis Tabbal (bigboss nospam at xmission.com)
Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:43:03 -0700 (MST)

True... it was mentioned that way to "keep it simple". There will be
protocol overhead with each transaction as well. While it may be a drop in
the bucket, why fill that bucket up early? I was thinking someone along
the lines of hourly updates.. not too much, not to little. It doesn't have
to be daily. Servers would have to decide.

On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, [iso-8859-1] Ragnar Kjørstad wrote:

> > The servers would be able to choose a time to receive updates. This makes
> > it so that only one server needs to get updates from a root server for a
> > given region. For example, if the root server were in the US, it could
> > send updates at a time good for the mirror in the UK, Germany, etc. And
> > other servers on that side of the pond can connect there in the off-peak
> > times. This keeps the load down for everyone and conserves trans-atlantic
> > bandwidth. ;)
>
> There is no reason not to update the data all the time.
> Either we use DNS or http, proxies will replicate the data automaticly -
> there is no need for sending updates.
>
> (IMHO)
>
> Ragnar Kjørstad
>