On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 09:30:51AM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote: > >Everything over port 443. > > well, that's obviously far better than everything over 80... > > And while I mean that ironically, there's a kernel of reality to it: > Beep was produced in response to the clear trend to put everything > over http. Beep is lower cost, by quite a bit. > > It then adds back some cost with the multiplexing mechanism, of > course. But that's why it replicates established multiplexing > mechanisms from lower layers. > > > For reference, I'm not lobbying for it's use, here. I don't have an > opinion for the IMAPnextgen discussion, but wanted to clarify why > beep was a long way from crazy.
SCTP seems like a great idea apart from the difficulty bootstrapping support - you need more than just application-level support. BEEP suffers a bit from the "you need a less-common library to implement it" problem too - but at least libraries seem pretty common. It's hard to argue with everything over 443 from a perspective of "just f'n well works for users" though. Bron. _______________________________________________ imap5 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5
