Just to be clear, clients are a fully integrated component of the base reload protocol. Motivation for them and some discussion of related issues is in the p2psip-base appendix (and a much more extensive discussion in pascual-clients and others), but the actual mechanisms to support them should already be in the base draft.
Discussion of further work identifying when a node should be a peer and when it should be a client, or overlay algorithms optimized for specific types of deployments, including "mobile", might be good topics for further work in new drafts, of course. Bruce On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Victor Pascual Ávila <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Henry, > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Henry Sinnreich <[email protected]> wrote: >> There was an I-D (now expired) on this: >> Pascual, V., Matuszewski, M., Shim, E., Zhang, H., and S. Yongchao, "P2PSIP >> Clients", >> <draft-pascual-p2psip-clients> >> >> It was preceded and followed by many discussions on this topic, such as that >> frequent p2p protocol messages for peer nodes will quickly exhaust the >> battery. >> >> Victor: What has happened to the I-D on p2p clients? > > The major motivation behind draft-pascual-p2psip-clients was to > convince the WG that the client role was desirable in some scenarios. > The client role is now discussed and included in a WG document, i.e. > draft-ietf-p2psip-base, Appendix C. > > If folks consider it makes sense to continue the client's work as an > standalone document, we are very open for suggestions. > > Cheers, > -- > Victor Pascual Ávila > _______________________________________________ > P2PSIP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip > _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
