On 9/5/07 11:20 AM, "Michael Slavitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "The IETF is really not so different from this list -- a bunch of > people getting together to make stuff work." > > Not so sure about that. > > The goal of participating in a standards body to either make things > work to commoditize the competition or gum things up so that they > never work, are horrendoes to implement, thereby creating barriers to > entry that only you can exploit. > > Look at IMS, for example. > > How easy is it to get ICE working, and I mean >working<, not "working". > > How long has it taken to develop and finalize? Here's the difference: "My new router doesn't work with my PS3" --> screw off! "My new router doesn't follow a basic internet standard" --> We'll replace that for you sir. People can test against standards implementations with much better accuracy than trying a bunch of stuff on the market. A standard for NAT traversal means that the NATs can start making sure *they* work with us, not just visa-versa. -- H. Lally Singh Ph.D. Candidate, Computer Science Virginia Tech [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
