> The point being that if you have an arbitrary bunch of firewalls and > NATs between any two points, then you are forced into telephone-like > "call set-up" scenarios, which don't really scale to large groups, > specially when the application consists of sporadic messages to > arbitrary destinations. or in general, that networked applications sometimes involve more than two parties that are mutually communicating (and they don't necessarily use TCP exclusively) a lot of the proferred solutions seem to assume that pairwise mappings are sufficient; they aren't. Keith
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables J. Noel Chiappa
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Jon Crowcroft
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Joe Touch
- First bit of IP Addresses Anshul Jain
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Sean Doran
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Valdis . Kletnieks
- RE: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Christian Huitema
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Bill Manning
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Bill Manning
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Keith Moore
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Keith Moore
- RE: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Fleischman, Eric W
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables David T. Perkins
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Ed Gerck
- head hurting [was Re: [midcom] WG scope/delive... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Dave Crocker
- Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables Pyda Srisuresh