From: "ara.t.howard" <ara.t.howard@...>
Date: 2007-10-12T14:25:05+09:00
Subject: [OT] Re: Reliable multicasting


On Oct 11, 2007, at 11:02 PM, Christoffer Lernö wrote:

>
> Ah, I should have mentioned I did check out spread, but its not a  
> canidate due to its need for a separate daemon process.

maybe it can be done - but it seems any reliable multicasting  
platform is going to have this requirement - after all someone needs  
to be listening on a port(s) to get messages right?

what's the alternative to not having a daemon?

btw - email is a good alternative for some applications - it's pretty  
dang reliable ;-)

a @ http://codeforpeople.com/
--
it is not enough to be compassionate.  you must act.
h.h. the 14th dalai lama