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 +0000, 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
