>>>>> "Tony" == Tony Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But, it's not. That's a potentially huge amount of data; people
>> aren't going to want to transfer that data to every machine they
>> might want to use, they're going to want a nice, central,
>> authoritative LDAP server to talk to.
Tony> They don't have to transfer it to every machine. Their
Tony> sys-admin can have the initial version set up on their
Tony> machine. If they need to use a machine that doesn't have it
Tony> installed, then it can ask the server - or any of the many
Tony> desktop servers that now exist. And, it could locally cache
Tony> all the information that it retrieves, so that it gradually
Tony> builds up the information that it needs.
It sounds like the model you're proposing is centralised-with-caching,
rather than p2p. Also, who keeps track of whether the data is up to
date? If my client machine is asking one of the new desktop servers for
a contact record, does the desktop server then go back and check hashes
against the main server? Does it return old information? Isn't this
all just adding latency to the client->server model without really
taking away any centralisation or adding any benefits?
Etc. :-)
- Chris.
--
$a="printf.net"; Chris Ball | chris@void.$a | www.$a | finger: chris@$a
chris@lexis:~$ perl -le'@a=($^O eq 'darwin')?qw(100453 81289 9159):qw
(23152 19246 2040);while(<>){chomp;push @b,$_ if grep {$.==$_}@a}push
@b,$^X;print ucfirst join(" ",@b[2,0,3,1]).","'</usr/share/dict/words
