At Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:05:12 -0400, Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC wrote: > > 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.
Well, for what it's worth: I can tell you what I believe the intention of the RELOAD authors to be: - RELOAD provides a system that works without the use of HIP transport. - RELOAD can be used to provide the rendezvous service that HIP needs. - RELOAD supports pluggable transports and can therefore be used over HIP. In this case, some of the services that RELOAD provides natively might be outsourced to HIP. However, someone would need to write a new document to define a HIP transport. -Ekr _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
