EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 September 2007 15:24
To: Morrell Richard
Cc: openslp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Openslp-devel] Problem with uncontrolled loss of DAs
You're right about my alternate suggestion. I had a different system setup
in mind.
I like option C the best. On my syste
ned). The periodic sending would be dependent on having a configured
> check period, which would default to disabled.
>
> Thinking about it, this option seems to have a lot going for it. What do
> you think ?
>
> --Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Nick Wagne
lt to disabled.
Thinking about it, this option seems to have a lot going for it. What do
you think ?
--Richard
-Original Message-
From: Nick Wagner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 September 2007 17:47
To: Morrell Richard
Cc: openslp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [O
In my systems everyone is on the same scope, so I haven't run into this
problem (and why I would prefer that any added mechanism would be disabled
by default). I'm a little curious as to how often multiple scopes are
actually used, and are used in the same manner as your system. What kind of
time
I have a problem with uncontrolled loss of DAs ie. where DAs can drop off
the network without sending out a corresponding DA advert, such as power
loss, or network device failure.
All the DAs in our system have unique scopes, and we perform unicast
searches of each scope (I have a patch to the 1.
