> > Perhaps the spec can be written in such a way that there is always a > > server and a client, and that in the case of 2 people wanting to talk one > > of the client will assume the role of the server. > > Could not agree more. This is exactly what I was to suggest - simple in > end-user implementation, consistent and uniform. A good start for robustness > and reliability.
Im still not convinced this is really needed for P2P mode, it means much higher requirements for the server role client, and im not sure we should be requireing the extra complexity of having to combine the two streams into one, what if both clients where pocket pc's ? they might not have the spare processor power but still want to use P2P, I think we should make sure the P2P mode extends as far as we can, not just for two people but up to as many as there is bandwidth available for, because I honestly dont think many people will host these servers because of the bandwidth they will consume, certainly not for free, and I dont think we should be forcing users to pay for something they dont have to. > Tim > > P.s. Pass-the-packet P2P round-robin will cause immense delays on > international VCs and is a lash...smacks of P2P looking for a use. Yea on second thoughts that could be a problem. _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
