Post-and-Poll

People who are designing message interchange frameworks that might need to become Internet-scale should consider this, and be careful of architectures that don't fall into one of these two baskets, because nothing else has yet been shown to work.

What about DNS? I don't think that one can generalize DNS into one of those two baskets, but it certainly scaled to Internet size.

I suppose one could argue that DNS follows a Post-and-Poll messaging framework, but then you have to ignore SOA and the hierarchy of .tld's and such. So, if DNS can be generalized into a "Post-and-Poll" style messaging framework, then an internal combustion engine could, too.

Trackbacks

Comments

From the original [with my comments intertwined]:

"post-and-poll, scales up too. It works like this: I post some data [hostname] which contains either messages or message pointers to a public place[IP address], and you poll [nslookup] periodically [TTL] to see what’s new"

How in the world would that NOT fit DNS?

Posted by chuckie on November 9, 2004 05:11 PM

The engine periodically "polls" the "tank" for "gasoline" and "posts" it into the cylinders for use.

How in the world would that NOT fit INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES?

Posted by J$ on November 9, 2004 05:28 PM

[One of] My point[s] is this, at some level of "abstraction", anything could be modified to fit the "post-pull" messaging system.

Posted by J$ on November 9, 2004 05:29 PM

Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You

DNS cannot be generalized into a simple post-pull messaging framework.

Posted by J$ on November 9, 2004 05:32 PM