Mikel,<br><br>Thanks for your candid response. If OAM changes its mind, or reaches the point where it is able to start accepting nodes, please let me know.<br><br>Anthony<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:36 AM, Mikel Maron <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mikel_maron@yahoo.com" target="_blank">mikel_maron@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">Anthony .. I'd be very happy for OAM to use the infrastructure you're talking about it. If it's so easy to find massive cheap hosting, consider yourself empowered to investigate the option. Once you have something solid for the community and the new steering committee to evaluate, let them know. <br>
<div> <br>I still think the community consensus is that the architecture of OAM should be set up in a decentralized way, for processing and hosting. Even if there are a couple mega-nodes, we still need the flexibility in case resources change.<br>
<br>Thanks<br>Mikel<br></div></div></div></blockquote></div>