Subject: [p2p-sip] To A or not to A

From: ksankar at cisco.com (Krishna Sankar (ksankar))
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 09:47:46 -0700

Agreed ;o) We are not really architecting a P2P network, but we do need
some form of cohesiveness for our work and the A-word does fit the bill
!

The 6LowPAN folks are looking at their work as "profiling", i.e.,
defining a subset that is interoperable in the specific domain. I think
this could work for us as well.

Cheers
<k/>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: RADHIKA.R.ROY at saic.com [mailto:RADHIKA.R.ROY at saic.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 8:34 AM
> To: Krishna Sankar (ksankar); Roy, Radhika R.; Mike Robinson; 
> Spencer Dawkins; p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: RE: [p2p-sip] Draft minutes for P2P-SIP BOF at IETF 65
> 
> Well, we are developing interfaces and protocols. We may call 
> them p2p-SIP protocol and interface architectures per se. 
> 
> We are just saying that we not developing p2p-SIP "networking"
> architectures, I believe.
> 
> Radhika
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krishna Sankar (ksankar) [mailto:ksankar at cisco.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:30 AM
> To: Roy, Radhika R.; Mike Robinson; Spencer Dawkins; 
> p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: RE: [p2p-sip] Draft minutes for P2P-SIP BOF at IETF 65
> 
> I think it is the other way around - we are not developing 
> universal P2P Architectures, but a SIP architecture 
> (interfaces, protocols) on the top of a semi-generic P2P 
> substrate; so we are developing a P2P-SIP architecture, but 
> not *THE* P2P architecture. 
> 
> The question, then, is not if *all* P2P paradigms are fully 
> researched and commercialized, but do we have a good enough 
> body of work that meets our purposes, and that,IMHO, is YES.
> 
> Cheers
> <k/>
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 	From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu
> [mailto:p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Roy, Radhika R.
> 	Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 8:21 AM
> 	To: Mike Robinson; Spencer Dawkins; p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> 	Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Draft minutes for P2P-SIP BOF at IETF 65
> 	
> 	
> 
> 	Folks:
> 
> 	 
> 
> 	Well, I guess that we not developing the arch for 
> p2p-SIP per se.
> 
> 	 
> 
> 	Best regards,
> 
> 	Radhika
> 
> 	 
> 
> 	________________________________
> 
> 		From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu
> [mailto:p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Robinson
> 	Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 2:30 AM
> 	To: Spencer Dawkins; p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> 	Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Draft minutes for P2P-SIP BOF at IETF 65
> 
> 	 
> 
> 	Spencer:
> 	...
> 	IRTF researchers say that
> 	        they are still studying P2P architectures, but ..
> 	
> 	
> 	    --mike
> 	
> 	
> 	
> 	
> 	
>