[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Executive summary of: RE: hard questions: request routing



Title: RE: Executive summary of: RE: hard questions: request routing


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Spatscheck [mailto:spatsch@research.att.com]

> Implementation wise it is a list and not a matrix. Obviously a list
> can be thought of as a degenerated matrix, however, I rather implement
> lists than matrices. So as I agree that you can think of it as a
> special case, restricting it to that special case simplifies the
> protocol needed.
>


Oliver,

1. Basically, you can implement any matrix as a list. You can even implemented it
   as a one dimensional array.
      Note: In our case, the matrix represents a graph.
2. The overhead with the matrix approach is very limited.
3. I'd rather have a structured general purpose solution as opposed to a restrictive one.
   The objectives here are to provide a solution that works as opposed to limiting the
   CDN peering concept due to the limitations of the DNS based method.

4. Do we know from content providers if the one or two levels compromise is ok or not???

PS: I am not promoting the matrix approach for any personal reasons, I just want a flexible
general purpose solution.


abbie