C. Scott Ananian wrote: > On Feb 19, 2008 5:47 PM, Robert McQueen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> A similar, but more standards-compliant[1][2] proposal might look more like: >> xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The key part of my original proposal is that it also works in the > (possibly temporary) absence of a school school or of network > connectivity to the broader internet. It can use DNS or mDNS if > available, again without requiring connectivity to the broader > internet or to the original schoolserver.
Indeed, but if you're able to make a mapping between the server-derived identities and the link-local identities, this goal can still be served. Currently we use the buddy key as this unifying key, but I very much like the idea of providing extra information to open up the prospect of communicating between schools, and allowing the XOs to exist in the global XMPP namespace. > Michael Stone suggested that the 'clever' part of the proposal, where > the domain name is directly mapped to a link local IPv6 address, could > actually be performed by a local DNS relay server on the XO. So, an > alternative might be something like: > xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > It shouldn't be necessary to contact a server to collaborate directly > with a peer. Correct, but the problem here is that makes the addressing essentially incompatible with re-using the existing (and globally-compatible) namespace. In general, people don't run one XMPP server each. The odd part seems to be that DNS must be involved. You don't need to mangle things via DNS in order to allow a higher-level component to interpret them and be able to make a mapping between identifiers (however they're derived) and local IPv6 addresses. > --scott Regards, Rob _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
