Thanks to everyone for their contributions so far. I will present
what I have at this afternoon's IETF WREC WG meeting, and encourage
everyone to continue to submit items. One observation so far is
that there has been very little overlap in the submitted problems.
This indicates we are a long way from having full coverage, so keep
the problem reports coming!
--- Henrik Nordstrom <hno@hem.passagen.se> wrote:
> Name
> Most entries related to ICP
> Comment
> I think the general consensus on ICP for the last 1 1/2
> year (at least) is that has a very limited application.
> It does not scale or handle network or server congestion
> very well. It is suitable for use on a LAN between closely
> related caches, but not in a WAN environment.
The fact that it is general consensus does not mean it should not
be reported as a known problem. For one thing, the consensus may
not be known to all cache players, especially the new ISPs and
companies, who are a primary target of this document.
So please keep the problem reports coming, even if they seem
"obvious" to you.
We need to decide what to do about problems that are known and have
a solution "in the works", like WPAD and URN work that Henrik
pointed out. Until a solution is adopted I think it still belongs
in this list. Other inputs (via email or in person today) very
much appreciated.
Best regards,
===
-- jad --
John Dilley
@ yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:26 MST