This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/db-wg@ripe.net/
Towards a better distributed database model..
- Previous message (by thread): Towards a better distributed database model..
- Next message (by thread): Towards a better distributed database model..
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Antonio_Blasco Bonito
bonito at nis.garr.it
Fri Jul 14 17:34:26 CEST 1995
> > > Hi, > > Here is a draft David and I put together. Comments/suggestios are > welcome. > > Thanks. > > Cengiz Just a comment: It is quite interesting to note how the distribution model you propose (non-hierarchical peering, neighbor registries, ...) resembles BGP ;-) a remark: assuming the "no source attribute" solution is chosen, which I see as the best, I understand from your phrasing: > [...] Each maintainer object specifies a registry which > is authoritative for the objects that are maintained by itself. > > When a user sends an update to a registry, that registry will forward it > to the registry which is authoritative for the object. The authoritative > registry updates its local copy of the database and invokes the flooding > protocol for other registries to pick up this change. > > Note that, if an object is registered in the database with maintainer X > who authorizes registry Y, all updates will be performed by registry > Y. This will ensure consistency within Y's copy of the database. If > someone tries to register the same object with a different maintainer than > X, Y (or any other registry) will deny the update with a maintainer > failure error. that the authoritative registry for a certain object is in practice the registry where the object's maintainer is registered. I think it should be expressed more clearly. Something like: [...] When a user sends an update to a registry, that registry will forward it to the registry which is authoritative for the object (i.e. the registry specified in the object's maintainer entry). [...] and a proposal: since the objects returned upon request by certain registry are actually data received by neighbor registries through some "distribution path" why not recycling the source attribute (or invent a new one) to keep track of that path? I'm prettu sure that this information may prove useful. ---------- ---------- Antonio_Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito at nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 (50) 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Telex: 500371 CNUCE I 56126 PISA Italy Fax: +39 (50) 904052 ---------- ----------
- Previous message (by thread): Towards a better distributed database model..
- Next message (by thread): Towards a better distributed database model..
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]