[AktiviX-discuss] RFC please .. devloping our infrastructure

[Alan Dawson]

Quoting scott <scott at aktivix.org>:

> hi,
> 
> ok, i'm a little bit not able to answer this now (had fun tonight!) but i'd
> like
> to say that a) tachanka is still a possibility - i think that we should
> discuss
> this more; b) it would be good to try to develop something along the
> tachanka
> model, even if this is different technically.
> 

I would very much like to continue with tachanka, but with the uncertainty over
hardware, also need to develop other contingency plans to move us forward 

Sure, having multiple servers spread across different locations would be  very
useful and allow us much more flexibility with backups and mutual aid.  In fact
we should probably make this a strategic aim.

The actual technical implementation is not as important ( and a diversity of
implementation could be seen as a strength ) as the agreement over certain
standards - which the server security protocols page 
http://stamp.poivron.org/SecurityProtocolsWorkingGroup/DraftTwo helps define as 
 common ground.

AED
-- 
"If you make decisions about software -- or anything -- based solely on
short-term cost and benefit, someone with a longer view can easily
manoeuver you into a trap from which it is hard to escape."