Re: Transport requirements for DNS-like protocols

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <[e-mail]>]

> To the extent to which I have a voice here, I don't want to
> waste time on "on topic" versus "off topic" discussions. ...

I got my money's worth from Rob's note. draft-mumble-epp-udp-checkmate
in another wg not entirely proximal.

We're teetering on the edge of farce, or bathos (IDN), but this note from
Patrik reminded me of an old i18n-haha [1]:

> We make the problem easier to solve if we have the ability to inside the
> protocol do ...
>    ... 
>  - Split the query load on more than one server, so the query
>    load can be shared (which imply that the server should not
>    keep state -- if at all possible)

So there was this big spindle set project that AT&T and NCR did, with
lots of go-fast and partition and dependency-removal and ... and more
go-fast.

To internationalize the app running on this wicked fast spindle farm,
all the US stuff went on the "U" spindle, all the GB stuff went on the
"G" spindle, all the FR stuff went on the "F" spindle, ...

It honked. So long as the data was in English. The Spanish data put the
US data on the E spindle.

Well, I thought it was funny. Estadios Unidos [2].

Eric

[1] Unicode shindig, Don Knuth (Stanford) keynote speaker, early 90's, in
    San Jose. It was a guy from Xerox who I recall telling the story.

See, not everything associated with the UTC is inherently evil, colonial,
or humorless, and they probably played only a minor role in the management
of Xerox.

[2] Which someone's Principle of Least Astonishment requires be expressed
    as "US", and with a straight face, to be consistent with iso3166.