Hi, Ekr:

I do not think that we need to re-evaluate the consensus.

Rather we have to see "how" HIP is used in P2PSIP in view of the consensus.

BR/Radhika

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Rescorla 
Date: Friday, June 27, 2008 10:47
Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] HIP for P2P SIP
To: Bruce Lowekamp 
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], P2PSIP WG , [EMAIL PROTECTED], Henry 
Sinnreich 

> At Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:40:39 -0400,
> Bruce Lowekamp wrote:
> > 
> > To some extent, these questions are orthogonal to the questions 
> about a 
> > potential relationship between HIP and P2PSIP.
> > 
> > Using HIP in a decentralized manner requires a distributed 
> rendezvous 
> > service (and distributed name service). An overlay such as have 
> been 
> > proposed by the various peer protocol proposals is ideal for 
> running 
> > such services.
> > 
> > P2PSIP requires a distributed registrar service. This service 
> also 
> > requires a peer protocol (and some layers on top) and is not 
> supplied by 
> > HIP.
> > 
> > Now there are still some architectural questions of whether the 
> peer 
> > protocol connections should be formed using HIP or not and also 
> > questions about how to provide the best interface for 
> applications using 
> > the services.
> 
> It seems to me that we're repeating ourselves. From the minutes
> of PHL:
> 
> The chairs called for consensus on the question "Should we ask 
> that protocols developed allow HIP to be a customer of the 
> P2Psip service,
> within the constraints of the charter?" There was no opposition.
> 
> The chairs called for consensus on the question "Should we 
> structure the P2PSIP service such that hip is a) a mandatory 
> part of the
> technical infrastructure b) an optional part of the technical
> infrastrcuture c) potentially present only when it replaces 
> IP, with
> no other linkage. Rough consensus for b as the current 
> answer, with
> further discussion as the technical documents describing p2psip
> protocols progress.
> 
> Do we really need to rehash the discussions that led to this consensus
> call?
> 
> -Ekr
> _______________________________________________
> 
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

Reply via email to