Re: [Storagesync] Storagesync Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

Saturday, Dec 5, 2015 1:09 AM Linhui Sun wrote:
> It sounds like this could resolve your IMAP issue to some extent. I'm
> wondering could we understand this in another way for the practical
> application: we have a group of servers and a group of clients. Inside the
> group of servers, they use a explicit distributed peer model and any new
> info will be propagated to the group members. Between the server group and
> client group, it is simply C/S model but a client can sync to arbitrary one
> from the server group. However inside the group of clients, they have no
> communications since I don't want my client to talk to anyone else.

Any two devices that share the same server and can update it, whether they use a peer-to-peer protocol to talk to the server or a client-server protocol, are communicating.   However, if you just mean that you don't want to do the work to set up the communication, but you want to use the same protocol in all cases, then yes, this is a good example of a configuration that could work with the peer-to-peer sync model: what peer-to-peer means in this context is simply that it in principle for any two participants can communicate, not that they are configured so that they _actually_ communicate.


--
Sent from Whiteout Mail - https://whiteout.io

My PGP key: https://keys.whiteout.io/[e-mail]