On Nov 5, 2010, at 7:26 PM, Mark Smith wrote: > On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 15:32:30 -0700 > "Scott Weeks" <sur...@mauigateway.com> wrote: > >> >> >> It's really quiet in here. So, for some Friday fun let me whap at the >> hornets nest and see what happens... >;-) >> >> >> http://www.ionary.com/PSOC-MovingBeyondTCP.pdf >> > > Who ever wrote that doesn't know what they're talking about. LISP is > not the IETF's proposed solution (the IETF don't have one, the IRTF do),
Um, I would not agree. The IRTF RRG considered and is documenting a lot of things, but did not come to any consensus as to which one should be a "proposed solution." Regards Marshall > and streaming media was seen to be one of the early applications of the > Internet - these types of applications is why TCP was split out of > IP, why UDP was invented, and why UDP has has a significantly > different protocol number to TCP. > >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> "NAT is your friend" >> >> "IP doesn’t handle addressing or multi-homing well at all" >> >> "The IETF’s proposed solution to the multihoming problem is >> called LISP, for Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol. This >> is already running into scaling problems, and even when it works, >> it has a failover time on the order of thirty seconds." >> >> "TCP and IP were split the wrong way" >> >> "IP lacks an addressing architecture" >> >> "Packet switching was designed to complement, not replace, the telephone >> network. IP was not optimized to support streaming media, such as voice, >> audio broadcasting, and video; it was designed to not be the telephone >> network." >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> And so, "...the first principle of our proposed new network architecture: >> Layers are recursive." >> >> I can hear the angry hornets buzzing already. :-) >> >> scott > >