Re: Advertisement Protocol -- more thoughts

[Eric Dean <eric@crystalballinc.com>]

Actually, I saw that Brad had embedded such a comment in an earlier
thread. 

A CDN surrogate could directly advertise the set of content which it is
authoritative for down to a proxy.  This advertisement could/should
aggregate to the best of it's ability. The proxy would then add that
advertisement to it's forwarding table.  The proxy does not have to
actually go retreive the objects and store them locally...though it's more
than welcome to.  

In other words, objects should be pushed to surrogates but not necessarily
to proxies; however, the proxies could be made aware of the content reside
within neighbor surrogate.

Better, yet.  There probably should represent some sort of arbiter that
acts on the behalf of the proxies.  Some large ISPs have an immense number
of proxies.  There is no reason that all the proxies couldn't receive
their forwarding table from some arbiter that peered directly with the CDN
surrogates.

On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Oliver Spatscheck wrote:

> Eric Dean writes:
>  > 
>  > A URL Exchange Protocol could support summarization like 
>  > url: http://www.blah.com/images/.*
>  >    
> 
> How would that work in a push model?
> 
> Oliver
> 

Eric Dean
President, Crystal Ball Inc.
W 703-322-8000
F 703-322-8010 
M 703-597-6921