Hi Martin, To add to what Stefano has already stated, the server is not obliged to use a topology map in this particular case. This should be in line with what most ISPs desire.
Best regards, Obi On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 14:43 +0200, stefano previdi wrote: > On Jul 28, 2009, at 2:37 PM, Martin Stiemerling wrote: > > > Stefano, > > > >> > >> On Jul 28, 2009, at 2:01 PM, Martin Stiemerling wrote: > >>> I've just learned in the session that there is actually a loss of > >>> functionality in the merger between Proxidor & P4P: the sorting > >>> server-based oracle is just gone. > >> > >> Proxidor capability of ranking/rating paths is still there and > >> functionality > >> is entirely preserved. > >> > >> See section 4 of the draft for details. > > > > hmm, which part of section 4? > > > > I assume that still the sorting feature *at the server* > > I'm not sure I understand "at the server"... > > if you refer to the case where: > - client send list of addresses > - server rank/rate/sort them > - server replies with an ordered list > > then, this is what we do in section 4. > > s. > > > > is lost. I remember Anja being keen on having that, and I do also > > remember that the ISPs liked this very much. > > > > I personally didn't like this too much, but still the server could > > do some sorting during the query time (see also the H12 draft). > > > > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
