On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:29:21PM -0400, Mark J. Roberts wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, Ian Clarke wrote:
>
> > For those who think that layer #2 should be a front-end to layer #1, all
> > you are doing is adding unnescessary bloat. Any smart implementation of
> > layer #2 will interface directly with the node, and there will be no
> > incentive to use layer #1.
>
> I disagree. Nodes have enough to do already. Layers 2 and 3 should be
> implemented as a separate program, in order to prevent duplication of
> effort and incompatibilities (which will be hell for client writers).
If there were likely to be more nodes than clients, then this would be
a valid concern, but the opposite is true. We may never have more than
2 node implementations, but we could have hundreds of clients (we already
have 5 or 6).
Ian.
PGP signature
