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