Please help me understand: > 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.
Since P2P SIP would run over HIP, the customer is P2P SIP, not the other way round as in the above. Just as SIP, RTP, etc. are customers of IP. Was this a typo? Thanks, Henry On 6/27/08 7:46 AM, "Eric Rescorla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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
