Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ryan.ramage@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=AztsYRcHuOqnlvXVhSPGQ3SUwFgP427+d4+xidS4e7AoP7EF4BR2HLZ3/UIq9D+Gvn
         YPzWbI+JvSnlWy8XOaPLAi46fweCJBZ8eH0KNfgpWfQizDGnEE6Ee7t2YC67B3tt0MW0
         VNvA4lk3m9dy5arxLzsrp1PSYZo4XNMVzr+h4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C5E64BBB-4664-468D-A49B-41A360AC707D@fastmail.fm>
References: <AANLkTing7yo-DgsSLb-1Y=F4g6pPNPzFyA3hgCSR+xf6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimZaKWitOQkH4kNYcHxD9RYR6YcM7P564K36Yea@mail.gmail.com>
	<C5E64BBB-4664-468D-A49B-41A360AC707D@fastmail.fm>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 08:32:24 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimOs6gAEXBKMG-0V+v_kZ3yngb9L=Z86W9j79mN@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Online-Offline URL strategy
From: Ryan Ramage <ryan.ramage@gmail.com>
To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for the ideas! Although they would work, I am not sure that
editing a users hosts file is a good practice or asking them to change
their dns to use  an installed dns on their machine.

In my app, the url the user interacts with *are* html pages, at least
for now, so I think I might switch my approach and use the offline
html5 spec.
I will cache the css and html and based on if they are online or not,
I will use jquery couch lib to either connect to a local or remote
couch. The local couch will have to have jsonp on.


On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Nitin Borwankar <nborwankar@fastmail.fm> w=
rote:
> You may need to run a skeleton DNS server on localhost which understands =
your address allocations.
>
> Nitin
>
> Sent from my mobile Internet device
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:10 PM, Joe Freeman <joe.freeman@bitroot.com> wrote:
>
>> How about you just always send the user to the local instance if they
>> have couch installed by putting '127.0.0.1 app.com' in /etc/hosts (or
>> similar). Then you don't have to worry about the 'remote'/'local'
>> subdomain. Anyone that doesn't have couch installed (and hence doesn't
>> have the customised /etc/hosts) will get directed to the remote
>> instance.
>>
>> The only problem is that users with couch installed locally won't be
>> able to access the remote couch directly (on the 'app.com' domain),
>> but if you can rely on couch syncing the databases, is this even a
>> problem?
>>
>> (Obviously you can't setup the replication using the 'app.com' domain,
>> as the local instance would end up syncing with itself?)
>>
>> Does that help?
>>
>>
>> On 10 March 2011 19:16, Ryan Ramage <ryan.ramage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ok, this maybe slightly off-topic for couch, but since it is the
>>> garden path couch has led me down for the design of my app, I am sure
>>> others here will have an opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is what I have:
>>> On a users machine, they have a local couch instance. It syncs up with
>>> a hosted couch. Here are some 'example urls'
>>>
>>> http://local.app.com/db/doc
>>> http://remote.app.com/db/doc
>>>
>>> (I have an A record dns entry =A0local.app.com -> localhost)
>>>
>>> Here is what I want:
>>> I want URLs that will failover to either the local or remote depending
>>> on what is available.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Situation 1.
>>> So lets say I am ROAMING with no inet connection. I open a =A0word
>>> document on my local machine, which contains the link:
>>>
>>> http://remote.app.com/db/doc
>>>
>>> When I click on the link, would there be a way that it get redirected
>>> to http://local.app.com/db/doc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Situation 2.
>>> Someone has emailed me a word doc, and I have no couch locally. I open
>>> a url in the doc:
>>>
>>> =A0http://local.app.com/db/doc
>>>
>>> Since I have no couch locally, could they be redirected to
>>> http://remote.app.com/db/doc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Situation 3
>>> So lets say I am ROAMING, BUT HAVE inet connection. I open a =A0word
>>> document on my local machine, which contains the link:
>>>
>>> http://remote.app.com/db/doc
>>>
>>> When I click on the link, would there be a way that it get redirected
>>> to http://local.app.com/db/doc
>>> This way the fastest copy will be used.
>>>
>>>
>>> My Initial idea (untested)
>>> I was thinking about having the following DNS entries:
>>>
>>> local.app.com =A0 IN =A0 =A0 =A0A =A0 =A0 =A0 localhost =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=
 =A0 =A0300s =A0 =A0 =A0 (5m)
>>> local.app.com =A0 IN =A0 =A0 =A0A =A0 =A0 =A0 74.74.74.74 =A0 =A0300s =
=A0 =A0 (5m)
>>> remote.app.com IN =A0 =A0 =A0 A =A0 =A0 =A0 74.74.74.74 =A0 =A0300s =A0=
 =A0 (5m)
>>> remote.app.com IN =A0 =A0 =A0 A =A0 =A0 =A0 localhost =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0300s =A0 =A0 =A0 (5m)
>>>
>>>
>>> Would that even work? I am not sure how a browser (or other client)
>>> takes the order or A records. Also, when offline, and no real dns is
>>> available, would there be a cached copy so at least
>>> it would resolve to localhost?
>>>
>>> So the discussion is about keeping, nice, world friendly URLs that
>>> might please Tim Berners-Lee, and also having the local/remote copies.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?
>>> Ryan
>>>
>