Subject: [p2p-sip] P2P-SIP-1.0

From: RADHIKA.R.ROY at saic.com (Roy, Radhika R.)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 08:17:22 -0500

David:
 
I agree with your proposals, and these are the right set of things to do.
Let us do it now.
 
Best regards,
Radhika

  _____  

From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu on behalf of David Barrett
Sent: Tue 3/28/2006 3:17 AM
To: p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
Subject: [p2p-sip] P2P-SIP-1.0

So decision #1 is whether to do something now, or go home and reconvene in 
12 months.  I vote we do something now. 

Decision #2 is whether we're going to expand SIP to support some list of P2P

features, or build a separate P2P system that SIP can leverage.  I think the

latter stands a higher chance of success. 

Decision #3 is what comprises this list.  Decentralized SIP proxy is 
certainly in.  I vote we do nothing more than that which is required to 
create an overlay network with bindings for use as a decentralized SIP 
proxy. 

Decision #4 is whether to use a specific algorithm (Chord, Kademlia, etc), 
or more abstract representation (ala overlayweaver) for the distributed SIP 
proxy.  I vote we list the axes of comparison, rate each option, and then 
pick one and run with it. 

Thus my proposal is we evaluate DHT options, build a generalized DHT layer, 
establish clear bindings whereby SIP clients can use this DHT as a proxy, 
and then iterate.  This is the P2P-SIP-1.0 plan.  This presumes there will 
be a 2.0 immediately following it, and a 3.0 immediately following that.  

What is your proposal? 

-david 

_______________________________________________ 
p2p-sip mailing list 
p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu 
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip
<https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip>