On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 03:18:36AM +0300, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 03:53:16PM -0700, Shawn T. Rutledge wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 01:26:37PM -0700, Doug Royer wrote:
> > > The largest problem with WAP is that they are now concerned that
> > > they have made a big mistake - they want the internet protocols
> > > so that they can interoperate with the internet. So they are
> > > backtracking and going with IP protocols.
> >
> > Funny how the technically best solution often loses to convenience...
>
> Disclaimer: I don't speak for my employer, my opinnions
> are not my employers opinnions.
> (My employer thinks that WAP is *the* best thing...)
>
> Sorry, IMO the WAP has never been "technically best".
Well I really don't know anything about it, was just using the
opportunity to babble about what I think would work. :-)
> - WML is loosely based on XML, and borrows some ideas from HTML,
> but of course there are concepts which just can't be translated
> thru nicely.
That sounds familiar actually. And sounds like a problem too.
> - Instead of running TCP at the mobile appliance, they use UDP
> to the WAP-GW (I am not sure of this, though), possibly to
> be able to ignore all the myriad rules about TCP backoffs, etc.
> (And not to require some 60 kB code for TCP implementation..)
So do they have their own error detection/correction scheme, or just
let the data be missing if it doesn't make it?
> - They need compression scheme because they think that current
> HTML&graphics-bload contained web pages are not processable by
> limited memory mobile appliances. (That is failure of web
> designers thinking that they can have 1000+ kB of stuff in
> single web page, and users who think that pretty graphics is
> an end in itself..)
Uh huh.
> - Instead of a general purpose compression schemes, they use
> XML/WML specific tokenization system which becomes suboptimal
> the instant the WML gets new attributes.
Hmmm. How is it tokenized? Common tagnames or attribute names
get replaced by a byte or two?
I've been wondering what would be a good replacement for the ad-hoc
APRS "standard". XML has been proposed as a possible translation of
the data but noone seriously considers it a good replacement for the
on-air protocol because of the verbosity and the bandwidth shortage
at 1200 baud. Maybe tokenized XML would work.
>
> unit, but larger scale things like digital mobile phones tend
> to have terrible time at getting thru a single 500 byte UDP
Why? The voice stream is data too, and it seems to be reliable enough.
> Such a proxy acks packets to the sender during the flow, and
> pushes data to the recipient with different timer rules (or
Makes sense.
> > kindof like computer power supplies... I've always thought it'd be nice if
> > they all came with aux. DC power inputs, so that a UPS could just simply be a
> > battery. But instead we need these complicated inverter things to convert
> > to 120V AC because that's all the power supply can accommodate.
>
> Right, and with "universal power supplies" (capable of using AC
> voltages from 110V to 250V), which would be the battery voltage ?
12V. The most common battery voltage (gel cells as used in UPS's, or
deep cycle lead acid batteries). I'm not denying it would require
design changes to the power supply, but if the laptop power supply
designers can do it, it should be cheap enough to do for desktop PC's
too. As it is, you can get a 12V PC power supply for automotive apps,
for about $130... only because it's a specialty.
>
> There are at least 4 digital connector specifications for that
> purpose. Maybe one of them will catch on.
> (And of course the display cards need to get that connector too,
> so that your favourite xyz gizmo card can drive LCD digitally..
> .. oops, only some rare ones have digital interface ?)
I know, that's the problem. I think I'll try and make do with CRT's
until they get their act together and solve it.
>
> When a message reaches environment where link connectivity
> does not (in real life) allow direct end-to-end interactive
> connectivity, nothing really prevents one from gatewaying
> from general Internet rules/behaviour to a hop-by-hop routing
> with e.g. static/periodically revised routing tables a'la UUCP,
> or BITNET.
Sure but there's nothing easy about it is there? How much can you
automate it, so that the user doesn't change his habits (destination
is still [EMAIL PROTECTED]) and the sysadmins between the source and
destination don't have to do anything either? If there's a way I'd
like to know.
> ...
> This is at least 6 years old idea, original inventors of HTTP
> protocol had in mind that we need (and we do!) a way to identify
> resources (e.g. HTML pages) independent of their locations.
Well there's also "tumbler" addressing as used in the Xanadu project.
I'd like to see that idea combined with this freenet thing somehow.
Anyway it seems the really grandiose ideas take forever to implement,
but freenet has real code running.
>
> How many times have you seen a movie advertisement which says
> www.xyzthemovie.com
> instead of www.distributor.com/movies/xyz/ ???
Yep.
--
_______ http://www.bigfoot.com/~ecloud
(_ | |_) [EMAIL PROTECTED] finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__) | | \__________________________________________________________________
Get money for spare CPU cycles at http://www.ProcessTree.com/?sponsor=5903
