Subject: Re: [Sipping] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-johnston-sipping-p2p-ipcom-01.txt

From: "Stephen Sprunk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 16:16:27 -0500

Thus spake "Johnston, Alan" <[email-masked]>
> I have updates my SIP P2P draft with some new ideas.
>
> Comments are, as always, greatly appreciated.

I've read through the draft a couple times now and I'm still scratching my
head on how it improves the situation.  It seems to require a new location
server and a new protocol to access it, but that server has effectively the
same function as a SIP registrar -- it's just not speaking SIP anymore.

Also, any UAC that didn't implement the new protocol would be required to
have an outbound proxy that does, potentially changing the triangle back
into a trapezoid.

Now, if the location service were actually some p2p protocol that doesn't
require a fixed server, that's interesting, but are there any such protocols
(even in academia) that are secure, reliable, and offer instant global
updates with tens of millions of intermittent nodes?

People have accepted that email is a trapezoid (most common) or triangle in
almost all cases; given how successful email is, why do we think that's not
good enough for SIP?  SIP already improves on email by having one protocol
for all legs versus a mish-mash of SMTP, POP, IMAP, and HTTP.

S

Stephen Sprunk      "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723         are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS                                             --Isaac Asimov

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP