[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  A dot L dot M dot Buxey at lboro dot ac dot uk
 To:  Richard Davis <richard at bizsyscon dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Monowall in the News.
 Date:  Wed, 3 Aug 2005 09:41:53 +0100

> This is frequently done when ghosting a ton of computers over a LAN. 
> Unfortunately it's not practical on the internet.

hmm, from my experience of ghosting, you set up an image to be ghosted,
you get all your clients to be ready to receive the image, then you click
'start' and the whole lot get ghosted in a one-off process. my awareness
of several multicast papers is that the image could be sent out on continual
round-robin - and, in fact, due to some extra features the clients could
start saving the image at ANY point int he stream, not just from the start block
- allowing massive files to be sent out as simple, continual 1 or 2mbit multicasts.
if such a mechanism could be accepted by the main carriers (like is done for MBONE
and BBC) then a single main multicast site could feed the world with all the
big images which currently cause such wasteful bandwidth usage - or bring sites
to knees when updates occur. anyway...the problems live higher up the internet foodchain,
as it were, as plenty of people have proposed such systems