Yeah, so his ideas cut accross all kinds of layers and aspects of
networking. so I don't think VOS can be "THE" solution to the problems
he explains, but it can provide a few key tools. Namely it can be a data
storage system, both for originals, and replicated copies, and for
store-and-forward, If we include stuff like hash "fingerprints", and
signing/encrypting data objects, versions, and caching and distributing
copies in a clever way.
Maybe it could be used for routing search/query/response messages, but maybe
not.
For discovering resources in a particular local communications
environment (e.g. local wireless network) it's probably best for
something like zeroconf or other broadcast queries.
Not sure how VOS could fit in with multicast. Not sure if that's
something we should worry about here, since multicast has turned out to
be something of a dead end on the internet, and most local networks as
well that haven't been set up with the possability of multicast in mind.
Reed
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 05:51:45AM +, Lalo Martins wrote:
> Aaron Bentley posted to the bzr list about a Van Jacobson talk:
> > I was watching this talk by Van Jacobson about a new networking
> > paradigm, and I started going "hey, I know this stuff".
> >
> > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6972678839686672840&hl=en
> >
> > Around 37:31, he starts talking about a new dissemination mechanism in
> > which you look for named data, rather than having conversations with
> > servers.
>
> I can't actually *watch* the talk, though, as stupid google video doesn't
> work in China. If anyone is interested, can you please watch, and post a
> summary? In particular, how much it's relevant to the way we're already
> doing things ("named data" sounds a lot like "vobject" from my chair).
>
> best,
>Lalo Martins
___
vos-d mailing list
vos-d@interreality.org
http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
