M,
I am implementing a cross platform C++ library which will be open
source and free. Will yours be "paid" and if not then why closed
source? The reason I ask is if it misbehaves with my implementation
the only reaction I can take is ban it and not investigate it. Then
again this all depends on if your using central or shared security
model and/or support both and if I retain Chord "periodic
stabilization" vs "cou" which the first creates churn even in the
absense of said churn. :-)
thx
-g
On May 8, 2009, at 8:38 AM, Michael Chen wrote:
g,
This thing is very much a moving target now. However, we do plan on
releasing a close source free Windows binary when it levels off
feature-wise. Stay tuned.
--Michael
glitch wrote:
I second this as it is also a hack in my implementation, at least
IMHO.
@Michael Do you have a public implementation for interoperability
testing? I cannot locate one.
-g
On May 7, 2009, at 11:04 AM, Michael Chen wrote:
Hi,
In draft-ietf-p2psip-base-02, section 5.3.2, the Forwarding
Header's length field was increased from 24-bit to 32-bit from
version-01. This change is unwarranted and should be reverted.
1) The maximum message size remain 24-bit (5.2.3. Message Contents
Format, payload). There is no need to have a 32-bit length in the
forwarding header.
2) This change throw off the alignment of all fields after
'length' in the header. They are now all start with an odd address
offset, and the fixed portion of the header (up to options_length)
is now an odd number.
This design incurs performance penalty on many hardware, and it
requires clumsy software implementation. It is just ugly. Some
common sense is in order.
Thanks
--Michael
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
