Hi, Trustin, Alex, and band, I'm not available to comment a lot of what has been written (in an hotel, being busy all day long while working for one of my client).
I will be short. I do think thate there are 2 misconception done about the 'protocols' we have under a Directory umbrella 1) We are not sandboxing because we don't believe in those protocols. We are sandboxing because we have a non documented protocol, and this is DHCP. It's a matter of time and committers 2) I saw another mail on MINA dev list, about DNS protocol being written into MINA umbrella. In my mind, this would be just like writing an B-Tree database in commons-collection, just because this kind of DB is B-Tree based, a typical data structure. (I will comment it later on MINA dev list) DNS, DHCP, NTP are protocols but are also about storing data. There is nothing wrong in developping the protocol codec somwhere else, but I don't believe it should be MINA. For instance, AsyncWeb is now invcubating, because it was simply using MINA, and having under a MINA umbrella was just limitating its audience. MINA is supposed to be a network framework, if you start to aggregate all the protocols under its umbrella, I think you will soon have problems managing the project. Ok, I have to go, I hope I will find time tonite for more comments. Emmanuel -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
