Just for the record, I share Alan's concern about (1) and hope I also raised
this concern previously (because I should have).
Spencer
Here are my comments on this draft.
I apologize for the repetition, but half of the technical issues I raised
back in March on the list and in Philadelphia haven't really had any
discussion. I'll also go through the other four issues as they have been
either fully or partially addressed.
There are also a few new issues as well.
Thanks,
Alan
- - - - -
Issues from March that have not been addressed:
1. The layering of the protocol
Currently, this protocol has functions from the application layer
(distributed database), transport layer (retransmissions), and internet
layer (fragmentation). Do we really need to do this? Do we have the
right expertise to tackle all these issues? Just saying that anytime an
overlay is used, there will be layer violations does not address this. If
we are not clear about what protocol layer functions we are building, we
will be in big trouble in the IESG and in the Internet in deployments.
Also, there is an open issue about what layer this interacts with SIP, and
whether a new SIP transport token needs to be defined.
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
