On 14 nov 2008, at 17:43, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
The Internet has two protocols that account for >95% of user
interactions, email and Web. Pointing out that one of those
protocols involves an IP address change en-route might be a single
data point but it is a significant one.
Also note that the same is true of IRC, Jabber and other 'chat' type
protocols.
There are very many things that I do less than 95% of the time that
are very important to me.
If you want to change the architecture such that IP addresses may
change in transit under certain conditions, I'm willing to have that
discussion, but I would rather not start from the assumption that the
two most braindead protocols that we use on the internet are shining
examples of how things should work.
Note though that IM has a number of functionalities, and several of
them operate peer-to-peer (file transfer, audio/video chat).
In fact the only application protocol I am aware of that is built on
the assumption that the IP address remains constant end to end would
be FTP which is an antique design.
Passive mode fixes this.
What I really want is a standards based protocol that keeps two
object stores in synchronization transparently and in real time. And
I want that protocol to be sufficiently simple and free of
unnecessary UI interaction that it can be embedded in a digital
camera, WiFi picture frame or the like so that once a device is
attached, updates are pushed transparently.
To quote a former AD of some notoriety: anyone with a keyboard and
time on their hands can write an internet draft. So go for it.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf