We've implemented a rate limiter for several reasons. Primarily due to
abuse. Secondary to that (but no less important) is our own limitations -
we are only allowed a finite number of connections per second to the root
registry. This is for each and every transaction (of which lookups are
included). The only way to prevent one (or a few) resellers from snagging
our entire connection allowance (thus blocking all other resellers) is by
placing a limiter in place.
Now, we're quite generous - normal business practice should notice no hit
- I'm not at liberty to discuss the defaults, but if you feel that in
regular usage you're hitting or exceeding your limits, let us know and
we'll take a look into things.
Charles Daminato
OpenSRS Support Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Michael David wrote:
> Ah, I see. :) Well then, how 'bout it Charles. Can we bump things up a
> bit?
>
> Cheers!
>
> Michael David
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 1:57 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lookup delay.
>
>
> If you take out the sleep it's faster, but less reliable. It doesn't
> work
> _every_ time.
>
>
>
> Michael David wrote:
>
> > Hi Daniel!
> >
> > I thought that came from your mods (~line 820), no? Anyway, I took out
> the
> > sleep statement, and it seemed to lookup faster.
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> > Michael David
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 9:19 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Lookup delay.
> >
> > Hey OpenSRS Staff people, I know your listening ;) What's the deal
> > with the command execution speed limit? The modification I made to the
> > lookup funtion ,in the reg_system, has a one second delay due to this
> > speed limit, I would really love to take that out. I'm sure the limit
> > was added because of abuse, but I'm hoping that there is some resolution
> > other than the execution limit. If my implementation is off, or there's
> > a way around the limit please let me know.
> >
> > Truely Yours,
> >
> > Daniel Walker
>
>
