On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Of course it should be given an unique IP address.
Actually there is no reason that a fixed IP is ever used. You actually
don't even need a fixed hostname (at least above the per-connection
level, you do it for convenience).
--
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, David Howe wrote:
> I think what I am trying to say is - given a "normal" internet user
> using IPv4 software that wants to connect to someone "in the cloud", how
> does he identify *to his software* the machine in the cloud if that
> machine is not given a unique IP address
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, David Howe wrote:
> I think what I am trying to say is - given a "normal" internet user
> using IPv4 software that wants to connect to someone "in the cloud", how
> does he identify *to his software* the machine in the cloud if that
> machine is not given a unique IP address?
at Monday, December 02, 2002 8:42 AM, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
seen to say:
> No, an orthogonal identifier is sufficient. In fact, DNS loc would be
> a good start.
I think what I am trying to say is - given a "normal" internet user
using IPv4 software that wants to connect to someone "
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Dave Howe wrote:
> Jim Choate wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Dave Howe wrote:
> > The scaling problem is a valid one up to a point. The others are not.
> > The biggest problem is people trying to do distributed computing using
> > non-distributed os'es (eg *nix clones and Mi
On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
> "Photons are bosons, so they don't interact with each other.
Generally, don't forget 'entanglement' which is clearly interacting with
each other ;)
> Well, by interfere I meant in the detectors of course. So are you telling me
> that two WiFi receivers
Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Dave Howe wrote:
> I believe I mentioned geographic routing (which is actually
> switching, and not routing) so your packets get delivered, as the
> crow flies. The question of name services. How often do you actually
> use a domain name as an end user? Not
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Morlock Elloi wrote:
> Self-routing mesh networks have potential to sidestep this. Transistors are
> small and cheap enough even today - the centralised communication
> infrastructure is there so that you can be charged, not because technology
> dictates that any more. With wi
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
> I just don't see how a single WiFi cloud will be able to scale very far. All
> the WiFi users within "eyeshot" of each other are always going to contend
> for bandwidth, no? It'll be just like the old half-duplex 10BaseT copper
There is limited bandwi
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Dave Howe wrote:
> without routing and name services, you have what amounts to a propriatory
I believe I mentioned geographic routing (which is actually switching, and
not routing) so your packets get delivered, as the crow flies. The
question of name services. How often do y
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/11/21/yourtech.wifis/index.html
--
We don't see things as they are, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
we see them as we are. www.ssz.com
11 matches
Mail list logo
