At 09:12 25/07/00 , J. William Semich wrote:
>An implementation of an IDN protocol is a forward-looking process
>- not a presently-constrained one. The idea that there exists
>some constant, call it "existing CPU resources," which should
>somehow constrain solutions targeted to the (12-24 month) future
>is a non-starter.
Disagree totally. If IDN can't be deployed due to lack of
deployed CPU resources, then its game over for all of us
(a very very bad situation).
>Given, any solution will need to work under current CPU constraints
>(and other resource constraints as well). But Moore's law is still
>at work.
I want to be able to deploy IDN (quite literally) as soon as
possible after the IETF standardises a specification. Each
proposal needs therefore to be considered in the context of
currently available resources.
>That said, yes, it's important that the impact of an idn solution on *all* resources
>be considered
Glad you now agree.
Ran
