Re: topological closeness....
At 6:15 PM 13/5/96, Vadim Antonov wrote:
Cacheing appears to be the only sane way to distribute load. You always know where the closest cacheing server is.
not even this is the case - you can guess but that may not always work! If I could _enforce_ caching by traffic interception then I could construct vaguely logical cache structures as an ISP. But relying on users to configure their end systems with the identity of the closest cache server using some ill defined "network metric" is always going to be an erratic affair at best. geoff
Having a dynamic determination of which cache to use (say, by using the one which responds fastest to a ping) wouldn't be so bad though. Have each site keep a list of cache servers it considers close enough, and pick the one with the instantaneous best performance whenever fetching something. -george william herbert gherbert@crl.com
On Tue, 14 May 1996, Geoff Huston wrote:
But relying on users to configure their end systems with the identity of the closest cache server using some ill defined "network metric" is always going to be an erratic affair at best.
I was wondering if someone had gotten around to intercepting the port 80 traffic and redirecting it to a local caching proxy. Doesn't seem much more difficult to do than NAT stuff and there are enough providers running FreeBSD boxes and the like as gateway routers that it may be worth trying as an experiment. Now that Cisco is adding NAT capabilities to the standard IOS it appears that these "non-routing" functions may not be too hard to get standardised across a large part of the net. Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-546-8022 Memra Software Inc. Fax: +1-604-546-3049 http://www.memra.com E-mail: michael@memra.com
participants (3)
-
George Herbert -
gih＠aarnet.edu.au -
Michael Dillon