Hi Henry, Wanted to comment on these - ran of of time before meeting for all of them but hope to get back to them later.
On Feb 28, 2008, at 4:13 AM, Henry Sinnreich wrote: > 1. Naming the protocol > > Reload-03 is already a nominal merger of about 5 other protocols and > more items may be added. In fairness, a new, neutral name is > therefore required. Why not call it P2PSIP-00? I would certainly be happy to see if we could find a better name. I don't know what the right name is but I think it should be associated with peer to peer. I'd love to get the a list possible names then just select one of the mailing list. I'd be fine with P2PSIP. (Part of the current naming had to do with we really needed the extra week between the 00 and non 00 draft deadline). > > 2. Added key technical features need real write-up > > Reload-03 claims the notions of > · Selecting the DHT, (we like such as Bamboo, Chord and > Kademlia) > · Defining a client protocol and > · The possibility of using HIP. > · Why not include the DHT AS A SERVICE as in the openDHT? > I think that someone will do this but it would be a storage usage on top of reload. I think it is better done as a separate document. I'd be glad to help if someone wanted to write such a usage. On a related note, Phillip is already working on a nice id/locator split document that could provide as a RELOAD usage an generic routing layer for applications that were non P2P aware. Cullen <with my individual contributor hat on> _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
