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@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf