> thank you, I think you've advertised this draft quite adequately for the
> time being. I'm quite willing to look at it, but there are numerous
Thanks! now I will relax and go home :)
> every possible alternative architecture to conclude that (a) most or all
> of these identifiers are necess
Hi everyone,
Please check out http://infs.sourceforge.net for a novel INternet
FileSystem (INFS) package which appears to be ideally suited to
cell phones and other small devices or appliances. By pushing the
DNS resolution to the kernel, INFS means to achieve the following:
- eliminates socka
Dear John,
On Fri 2002.11.01, John Stracke wrote:
> V Guruprasad wrote:
>
> >- eliminates sockaddr_t handling in the user space, allowing
> > application code to become free of IPv4/IPv6 (or for that matter
> > raw Ethernet or ATM) dependencies;
> >
> Doesn
On Fri 2002.11.01, Keith Moore wrote:
> > Please check out http://infs.sourceforge.net for a novel INternet
> > FileSystem (INFS) package which appears to be ideally suited to
> > cell phones and other small devices or appliances. By pushing the
> > DNS resolution to the kernel, INFS means to ac
Thanks for your thoughtful comments and look forward to more.
Since I wrote INFS back in May-Jun, I already have had discussion on
some of these issues, as given below.
-p.
On Tue 2002.11.05, John Stracke wrote:
> The problem is that only the app knows what kind of caching behavior it
> needs.
On Tue 2002.11.05, Keith Moore wrote:
> No it doesn't, because your overloading of DNS names for this purpose
> interferes with their utility for other purposes.
>
> Keith
Imho, use of A records is not an overload.
On Tue 2002.11.05, Keith Moore wrote:
> purposes, or for all apps. My concern is that an API that "encouraged"
> apps to use DNS (by making it difficult or infeasible to use IP addresses)
> would cripple that's platform ability to support some kinds of apps.
INFS is simply a VFS wrapper aroun
On Tue 2002.11.05, John Stracke wrote:
> >I see both as largely system calls API issues, permitting simple and
> >elegant solutions, and as not fundamental networking constraints that
> >would legitimately rule against the INFS approach.
> >
> I disagree. The answers you give seem to say that y
On Wed 2002.11.06, John Stracke wrote:
> V Guruprasad wrote:
>
> >In short,
> >you continue to have the full socket API with no impediment to its use.
> >
> This is misleading. You say that your main motivation here is to move
> the identification role out o
On Thu 2002.11.07, Keith Moore wrote:
> And those shortcomings are more-or-less inherent in DNS - you really
> can't fix it and still have a namespace with the characteristics we
> want in DNS - e.g. federated assignment, federated lookup, and ability
> to assign names to groups of hosts or ser
Dear Keith,
Sorry I couldn't respond earlier (if, that is, a response was expected).
On Thu 2002.11.07, Keith Moore wrote:
> problem is, if you keep the same API, then apps that depend on that API
> will expect that the name space has the same characteristics as DNS,
> (benefits and shortcomin
ooking in the right places...
Could you or anyone else possibly give me a pointer?? I'd be greatly obliged.
thanks,
-prasad.
---
V. Guruprasad,
Inspired Research LLC.
http://www.columbia.edu/~vg96/papers.
> Were we to i) incrementally deploy and start using new globally unique
> namespace(s) [either a single one functioning much as IPv4 addresses
> functioned originaly, or, as many of us think would be wise, two separate
> ones, one to identify entities for end-end communication and another to give
> If you find a way to select paths in real networks using only virtual data,
> we'd all be interested to hear it.
Try draft-guruprasad-addressless-internet-00.txt, and
the ECUMN'2000 paper on which it was based, at
http://affine.watson.ibm.com/tmp/vinet.pdf
The draft doesn't yet mentio
Hi Keith!
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Keith Moore wrote:
> mumble. as far as I can tell, both DNS names and IP addresses
> are hopelessly overloaded and are likely to stay that way until
> we figure out how to make a major architectural change.
Could you please take a look at
draft-guruprasad
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Jon Knight wrote:
> are on and what the address of their gateway router is. Not exactly what
> I'd call omniscience.
All right, I confess, I'm not perfect in summarising the existing art and
relating to it (yet). I promise to gratefully acknowledge comments such as
these t
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Mike Fisk wrote:
> explosion. So over time there becomes an established club of roots and
> everybody else has to be a child. That creates a monopolistic situation
> where you have to pay a root node for transit. It could work, but it
> sounds worse than the existing DNS
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Mike Fisk wrote:
> It's one thing to hand out addresses or names. It's another thing to run
> a top-level routing server that all of your children customers have to
> route through to get to other top-level providers. Your mapping between
> the two would imply that, for i
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, John Stracke wrote:
> > Why don't you read the I-D
>
> I did.
Then you'd see that the invisibility refers to that of the server
host, as follows: The client sees only the service name binding
in the form of the URL, but what it gets as the data path is
a virtual path (or L
I've taken the liberty of posting it to the mailing list as IMHO the issues
Joel raises are very pertinent and I believe worthy of general consumption.
[Also, I use colourful syntax highlighting in Vim under Mutt, which makes
it easy for me to view the inline quotation. I realise it will look pl
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, John Stracke wrote:
> I say it's a weak form because I believe you are wrong in stating that "a
> unique server host address does not exist". The URL (ick) is an address
> for the server; it's just a higher-level address than an IP address.
The "URLs" in my approach do not
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Keith Moore wrote:
>
> maybe the registration form should have a short quiz on material from
> these documents, which must be filled out before the form is considered
> complete. and if not completed successfully the prospective
> registrant is warned that he may be wasting
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Ken Hornstein wrote:
> That hasn't been my experience; I've seen what can only be described as
> an "old-boy" network in operation. I'm not saying that such a thing is
> necessarily bad, just that sometimes it takes significant effort to
> overcome it if you're a newbie.
Bo
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Michael Richardson wrote:
> The wireless access is likely key to actually giving everyone a chance to
> get online, but I recall a lot of useful work that occured in the terminal
> room. I also recall deciding to go to the terminal room rather than find a
> session that
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Mike Fisk wrote:
> Yes, I was being slightly more general to include other gateways that
> don't necessarily operate at the application layer:
> TCP-splicing/spoofing, NAT, SOCKS, etc.
>
> The problem is that the protocol mechanisms to discover and use these
> gateways ar
{I had written:}
> | from label switching, so what I'm suggesting is that we take the bull by
> | the horns once and for all and run MPLS over IP instead of under it...
>
> an mplsd-like tag fits neatly in the first half of an ipvsux destination
> address, although there are other places in t
> IMHO what we need to change is the *implicit* association between
> "host" related identifiers and "network topology" related identifiers -
> so that coders treat them as separate entities, and provide a way
> for the two to be different at the IP layer - while still allowing
> the optimization
On Thu, 2001.02.01, Hilarie Orman wrote:
> Dave Cheriton's TRIAD is an example of such a proposal.
>
> Hilarie
>
> >>> Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02/01/01 11:05AM >>>
> At 03:05 PM 1/31/2001 -0800, Ed Gerck wrote:
> >You miss at least one other possibility. If it is possible to develop
Eliot,
On Wed, 2001.02.14, Eliot Lear wrote:
> With all the discussion of Napster and so-called "peer to peer" networking,
> I think NATs are going to become far more visible to users as these
> applications grow in popularity. Today, you can use something like Gnutella
> if at least one party
On Thu, 2001.02.15, Lloyd Wood wrote:
> that webpage is still black on black.
The style file on http://affine.watson.ibm.com/tmp/ has been commented out,
since some versions of Mozilla (4.05 on SunOS 5.6??) appear to be broken.
-p.
> You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
> the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
> you can do the same at your new location, provided
> there is no conflict. This seems to be more similar to the
I suspect it only works in rural areas - I recall walking past 27A Wim
Hi,
On Wed 2001.02.21, Bora Akyol wrote:
> I am trying (trying is the key word) to write Internet drafts on a
> powerbook using MS Word with the template from the IETF web-site,
> then using a PC to convert Word to text per the instructions.
>
> Is there a better way to write IDs on a Mac?
I
On Wed 2001.03.21, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
> this is a solicitation to peopel that know london
> (the venue for the next ietf)
Any idea when this is likely to be?
[
Sorry I couldn't make it to "mpls" to enjoy the winter, this prototype for
my I-D has me so tied, but I'd sure like to plan for th
33 matches
Mail list logo