Re: Reality Check and Ideas
August Zajonc (augustz nospam at bigfoot.com)
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 16:46:33 -0800
Nicer and nicer.... There is a real technical elegance to this approach,
Then why do I just itch to do the http thing. Because it's lowest lowest
common denominator? No, proxies which deny DNA are not that common. Because
I still think it is easier to implement http wise (everyone who has their
own webserver can run DNS, but not everyone who has a web account could,
whereas they could provide http) but even that is not really convincing
because we are not looking for thousands of mirrors... 20 at the tops, plus
international... Maybe its because DNS doesn't allow you to specify which
server is closer, you are stuck with walking down the list of NS's after the
main one. No again, clients can code around this... Who knows...
I think it comes from, everyone's been doing http with CDDB so far, why
change the paradigm. And, do we really nead all that? Who knows... Michael,
any thoughts on the coding side of using DNS?
At least lets get rid of the NNTP idea once and for all...
August Zajonc
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Cox <alan nospam at redhat.com>
To: cdindex nospam at freeamp.org <cdindex nospam at freeamp.org>
Date: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: Reality Check and Ideas
Ok my argument for DNS is this