Subject: Re: Possible new Real-Time Applications and Infrastucture (RAI) Area

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 01:09:58 +0200

FYI. On IETF main.

At 23:05 19/09/2005, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>I guess I would go for "Low Latency Applications and Infrastucture " 
>(LLAI) myself.

Do you conceptually accept in that wording that an OPES can be 
plugged in there, for example as part of a service to the exchange? 
The WG-OPES has worked on HTTP, and now on SMTP. IMHO OPES also fit 
pseudo-synchronous exchanges. In that case the WG-OPES should be able 
to dialog with the new area at a later stage.
jfc

---

From: Markus Hofmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:25:25 -0400

JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> Do you conceptually accept in that wording that an OPES can be plugged 
> in there, for example as part of a service to the exchange? The WG-OPES 
> has worked on HTTP, and now on SMTP. IMHO OPES also fit 
> pseudo-synchronous exchanges. In that case the WG-OPES should be able to 
> dialog with the new area at a later stage.
> jfc

Conceptually, the OPES framework could also be applied to "real-time 
applications" - at an earlier stage, we discussed applicability to RTP, 
for example.

-Markus