Hi all,
I hesitate to write something that sounds like a commercial for my own
stuff, but it really just fits so well:
Lars wrote:
Also note that when I say "maintenance", I mean we should be doing
bug fixes and minor improvements that make the currently specified
DCCP protocol more appealing to potential users. *If* more
substantial extension
Later, Gerrit wrote:
> It is a chicken-and-egg problem. In its current form, the TFRC
implementation buys
> no compelling performance advantage over using UDP.
(let's ignore the word "performance" here, I think it doesn't quite
fit - but it's about the compelling advantage, i.e. reason to use it)
THIS is EXACTLY what we want to achieve with MulTFRC:
http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~michawe/research/projects/multfrc/index.html
I think that we need things like these, that give the potential users
of DCCP some sort of "service", i.e. some reason to use the protocol.
Cheers,
Michael
