httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Peter J. Cranstone" <Cranst...@worldnet.att.net>
Subject RE: 1.3.15
Date Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:01:27 GMT
> How is this different from, say, sh? The Action directive? Winzip?

I don't know?

Maybe a 1000 TPS on a PII 300, maybe the ability to out compress WinZip,
maybe the ability to support any web server/proxy server, maybe the ability
to do it all in 45K, maybe the ability to take a multithreaded safe version
of zlib reduce the core components to 10,000 bytes for the encoder and pack
it all into a cell phone.

Cheers,


Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Laurie [mailto:ben@algroup.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 3:50 PM
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: 1.3.15


"Peter J. Cranstone" wrote:
>
> Roy...
> Peter here...
>
> I'll let Kevin respond to the rest of this email, but I will cover this
> point.
>
> > The reason why it has to be official is because RCI claims to have
> > "patent pending" rights to a technology related to this module.
>
> This is totally FALSE and MISLEADING. We have never claimed to have a
patent
> on this technology. The patent which is pending is on the "smart engine"
> which can use ANY compression algorithm. There are simply a ton of
> compression patents out there, we even own some with some more pending on
> XML etc, but our patent is specifically tied to the engine which runs the
> algorithms not the algorithms themselves. I heard an Apache member the
other
> day talking about RCI's patent claim on mod_gzip, hopefully this will
clear
> the picture somewhat.

I'm amused ... a "smart engine" that can use any compression algorithm?
How is this different from, say, sh? The Action directive? Winzip?

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit."

Robert Woodruff


Mime
View raw message