Re: New proposal from Ronald J. Fitzherbert

["Rick H. Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>]

On Dec 2,  9:55pm, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> Subject: Re: New proposal from Ronald J. Fitzherbert
>
> Kent Crispin writes:

[snip]

>
> The only reason this isn't practical as a standard is that we really
> need an open protocol, for a wide variety of reasons. However, for a
> cooperating group of registries trying to operate a shared lock
> database, this would be perfectly practical tomorrow morning.
>
> Perry

Perry,

Well its almost tomarrow morning....

I would like to announce my first management interface to the
Shared-TLD regestry server I released last week. This time I wrote
a set of java applications that allow you to manage Contact, Name Server,
and Domain Object through over the web. The entire set is written in java.

I'll post another message with a more fomal overview, I just couldnt
pass up the oppertunity to comment on this thread.

I did mention the server I wrote is in C++, and is multi threaded. Yes
it provides object level locking, and its reliable and has hooks
for C, C++, and java. Oh one other thing, this demo shows some of
the consepts you folks have been talking about...

-Rick

-- 
Rick H. Wesson