[SWMP] Re: faster field messages

"Jay C. Weber" <jweber@mediamachines.com> Wed, 29 August 2007 16:09 UTC

Return-path: <swmp-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IQQ6e-0002KO-Cx; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:09:24 -0400
Received: from [] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IQQ6c-0002KJ-UI for swmp@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:09:22 -0400
Received: from mx5.roble.com ([]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IQQ6c-0007JT-JS for swmp@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:09:22 -0400
X-Scanned-By: PostConf Email Solutions
Received: from [] (h-66-134-93-202.snvacaid.covad.net []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jay) by mail.mediamachines.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 913A936441D; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <46D59A2D.1010404@mediamachines.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:09:17 -0700
From: "Jay C. Weber" <jweber@mediamachines.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: john_patterson@us.ibm.com
References: <OF95516987.80B2064B-ON85257346.00579557-85257346.00581671@lotus.com>
In-Reply-To: <OF95516987.80B2064B-ON85257346.00579557-85257346.00581671@lotus.com>
X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Cc: swmp@ietf.org
Subject: [SWMP] Re: faster field messages
X-BeenThere: swmp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of a Simple Wide-area Multiuser-3D Protocol <swmp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/swmp>, <mailto:swmp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/swmp>
List-Post: <mailto:swmp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:swmp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/swmp>, <mailto:swmp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0477691540=="
Errors-To: swmp-bounces@ietf.org

john_patterson@us.ibm.com wrote:
So each side gets to declare its own mapping and the other is obligated to keep track of that.  Servers can use the same id for everyone becasue they get to declare the id they'll use.  Can I declare a mapping on a reliable channel (TCP) and use it on an unreliable channel (UDP)?  That would be helpful, since the first use establishing the mapping should be protected from loss.
Exactly the way I was thinking, the first message gets sent reliably and enables a stream of very-low-latency, potentially-unreliable, updates.


SWMP mailing list