Hi Roni, responses inline
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 5:38 AM, Roni Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Bruce, > I am not sure what is covered under > > " Addresses concerns about allowing topology-aware implementations to be > built without changing the base protocol or overlay algorithm." I assume it > has to do with the symmetric recursive response text. This is a change to 10.7.3, the stabilization for the chord-like overlay algorithm. In -00 the text describes only how to use random selection for finger table entries and uses MUST to require this. In an earlier thread, Das asked if topology-awareness could be used to select finger table entries, and I agreed to change the wording in that section to make the random selection a SHOULD but state that an implementation or additional spec MAY use a different algorithm to replace the random selection if it meets certain conditions. New wording will be in -01. > > Just a reminder that we discussed also adding a flag that will not allows > intermediary peers to keep state of the call. I have that in my TODO list. I intend to post a proposed way (or set of possibilities) to address this in the next few weeks. I also have the change to make 5.1.2 that defines responsible id, other id, and private id a separate subsection rather than place it within the definition of recursive symmetric routing. I had meant to include this change on my slide in Minneapolis, but forgot. Will also get that done in the next few weeks. Bruce > Roni Even > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Bruce Lowekamp > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 7:15 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [P2PSIP] reload base draft changes from 73 > > During the presentation on draft-ietf-p2psip-base-00, there was > consensus to make a number of changes to the draft. Unless there are > significant objections raised on list, I will make these changes to > the draft. A few other issues will be in separate threads. > > Bruce > > - remove TUNNEL > > In Dublin we agreed to remove TUNNEL if no adequate use cases were > brought to list to justify its inclusion. None have been brought to > list. > > - Decouple overlay description from enrollment server > > The draft currently says the overlay description is obtained from the > enrollment server. Remove that statement so the overlay description > can come from anywhere and can point to the enrollment server. > > - Reword finger table entry selection to allow other algorithms > > Addresses concerns about allowing topology-aware implementations to be > built without changing the base protocol or overlay algorithm. > > - Large messages > > Error codes will be introduced to signal messages too big. (more > changes may be agreed on later, but we appeared to have consensus that > at least those are necessary in the base.) > _______________________________________________ > P2PSIP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip > > _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
