[p2p-sip] __A_New_Internet-draft_is_available

[slavitch at gmail.com (Michael Slavitch)]

I fully agree that it must wait until well after the charter.  Get the basic
physics working first.


On 8/24/06, Henry Sinnreich <hsinnrei at adobe.com> wrote:
>
>   patent chasers: 1st time we saw this)
>
On this, I must quote Dr. Strangelove: *"*Yes, but the... whole point of the
doomsday machine... is lost... if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell
the world, eh?"  The sole reason IP is useful is because it was told to the
world and it is simple.  Technically, old dead IPX is better, but that
didn't matter because it was too much of a trade secret.  The biggest
problem with global PKI, for example, is that too many organizations want to
control identity acces and policy and use it as barrier, not as an
opportunity for communication.
When I scripted a stark and simple SIP TCP UA  after one reading of RFC3261
I knew SIP would win.  The same lazy ease must be possible with hierarchical
overlays, their policies, and their provisioning.  Feature richness, done
well, will follow, like with HTTP.  Tim Berners-Lee may have anticipated
WebDAV replacing proprietary file servers (see his first post regarding the
web:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.hypertext/msg/06dad279804cb3ba?dmode=source&hl=en)
but did anyone expect the explosion that happened?

Could anyone have anticipated iTunes or eBay or YouTube or MySpace? That the
web 'revenue model' turned out to be advertising and e-commerce for travel
and cars?

The patent chasers and complexity hounds will have plenty of opportunity to
patent applications and create artificial nuances for this new
environment.  That lesson was sadly learned from core SIP.  It is my opinion
that P2PSIP automation and policy must be so ubiquitous and easy as to
create a functional ecosystem that does not depend on the whims of one
dominant vendor.

Likewise it can't rot in patent isolation by a technology company that
cannot or will not exploit it.  The "how" should be common.
The "what" offers much that can be left to the imagination.


Regards To All

M



   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu [mailto:
> p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu] *On Behalf Of *Michael Slavitch
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 24, 2006 8:54 AM
> *To:* K.Yamamoto
> *Cc:* p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
>
> *Subject:* Re: [p2p-sip] __A_New_Internet-draft_is_available
>
>
>
> WHEN YOU CAN MANIPULATE NODES OF MULTIPLE OVERLAYS, WHY NOT MANIPULATE
> THEM TO USE ONLY ONE OVERLAY?
>
>
>
>
>
> Different overlays will correspond to different groups and regimes, with
> different rules and behaviors. The base overlay connects them together using
> rules of its own.  Overlays that recurse with independent behavior allow for
> rich collaboration based on organized groups with implicit security and
> choice.  Hierarchical, selective or authoritative organization is but a
> subset of self-organization, it is just far more automated.
>
>
>
> It is this aspect of overlays, the ability to nest overlays upon each
> other, that makes P2PSIP truly powerful, more powerful than most most could
> even imagine, as the application space changes completely.  Self-organizing
> automated systems could replace much of the cruft and kludge of the
> Internet.  I assert that P2PSIP becomes truly useful if such overlays are
> not only permitted but clearly defined for easy implementation.  It looks
> like P2PSIP will go that way as long as we remain vigilant, supportive and
> smart.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 8/24/06, *K.Yamamoto* <kyara543 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I AGREE HIERARCHICAL MORE EASY AND DISLIKES MESS TOO.
>
> BUT UNLESS YOU DELIBERATELY MANIPULATE EVERY MULTI-OVERLAY NODES SO THAT A
> NODE CAN SAY "HEY, MY CHORD STACK DOES NOT CONNECT WITH ANOTHER CHORD NODE
> ALSO IN PASTRY OVERLAY BUT CONNECT WITH THE OTHER CHORD NODE ALSO IN BT
> OVERLAY", OTHERWISE AUTONOMOUS INTERCONNECTION OF MULTI-OVERLAY NODES VERY
> POSSIBLY WILL FORM A CYCLIC MESH.
>
> EXAMPLE: LETS DENOTE A NODE OF MULTI-OVERLAYS X AND Y AS XY. INTERCONNECT
> NODES ABC, AC AND BC FORMS A MESH.
>
> WHEN YOU CAN MANIPULATE NODES OF MULTIPLE OVERLAYS, WHY NOT MANIPULATE
> THEM TO USE ONLY ONE OVERLAY?
>
>
>
> THANK YOU.
>
> --KY
>
> PLEASE QUALITY CONTROL LIKE BUILDING A LEXUS.
>
>
>
> *Juwei Shi <jwshi at bupt.edu.cn>* wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes, I agree with Seaward, hierarchically inter-connecting heterogeneous
> overlays is more practical than the mesh based approach.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  Interworking among heterogeneous hierarchical is more efficient than do
> it meshy, you can not expect a flat huge mesh over whole world can work
> reliably, the reason why mesh is used is the absence of a acceptable
> standard.
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Seaward
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu [mailto:p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu]
> *On Behalf Of *K.Yamamoto
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 24, 2006 2:16 AM
> *To:* Juwei Shi; p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> *Subject:* Re: ?????: [p2p-sip] A New Internet-draft is available
>
>
>
> WHEN NUMEROUS MULTI-OVERLAID NODES ARE INTERCONNECTED, " the interworking
> among heterogenous overlays" IS GENERALLY MESSY NOT HIERACHICAL.
>
> THANK YOU.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   --KY
>
>
>
>   PLEASE QUALITY
>
>  CONTROL LIKE BUILDING A LEXUS.
>
> *Juwei Shi <jwshi at bupt.edu.cn>* wrote:
>
> The NAT issues will be discussed in our future drafts.
>
> This draft focuses on the interworking among heterogenous overlays and the
> SIP-over-P2P architecture in one single overlay is proposed by E. Shimetc.
>
> http://www.p2psip.org/drafts/draft-shim-sipping-p2p-arch-00.txt
>
> Thanks
>
> Juwei
>   ------------------------------
>
> *
> K.Yamamoto [mailto:kyara543 at yahoo.com]
> 2006?1?8 ???23??**?** 12:21**
> **: *
>
> *????**?**?**:** Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for
> 2?**?/min or less.*
>
> * *
> *
> ------------------------------
> *
>
> *Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman1/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http:/voice.yahoo.com>to
> the US (and 30+ countries) for 2**?/min or less. *
>
>
>   ------------------------------
>
> Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small
> Business
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=41244/*http:/smallbusiness.yahoo.com/>.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-sip mailing list
> p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/p2p-sip/attachments/20060824/83d370dd/attachment-0001.html