Michael, when you think about your comment a bit more then you will realize that it is not up to us to decide how the hour glass (of deployed protocols) looks like.
Ciao Hannes > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2008 14:36 > An: ietf@ietf.org > Betreff: RE: I-D > Action:draft-rosenberg-internet-waist-hourglass-00.txt] > > > > > - "the GOOD news is that the wasp waist-hourglass is no > longer HTTP" > > [RFC3205], or > > > > - "the GREAT news is that the wasp waist-hourglass isn't > Skype (yet)". > > The REALLY GREAT news is that when IP ceased to be the wasp waist, > TCP/UDP moved to fill that position which implies that having a > wasp waist in the protocol stack is a stable state towards which > the protocol set wants to converge. > > Therefore, there is good reason to encourage this wasp-waist to > be the right part of the protocol stack. Which means that we should > conciously think about, and discuss, where the wasp waist should > be. And we should try to reinforce positioning the wasp wasit at > the optimal point of the stack. > > Is TCP/UDP the right place which we should try to reinforce, or > should we instead try to move it back down to IP as version 6 > becomes more widely deployed? > > --Michael Dillon > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
