On Tue, October 18, 2011 16:46, Leif Hedstrom wrote: > I don't know if the docs are clear, but clustering is superior to ICP in > every way. That is one reason why no one has cared for ICP I think. The main > reason for us to get ICP working is for interoperability with other ICP > caches (e.g. Squid). > > Also, ICP is a flawed protocol, a better option is for us to implement HTCP, > which Squid also supports.
Thanks for the comments, Leif. I lockjawed onto ICP since I was most familiar with it, assuming it was the best way to allow inter-node sharing of cached pages. I've been trying out ATS' clustering facility, and you're right, it's superior. h
