Pieter Hintjens wrote: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Greg Wilkins <gregw at webtide.com> wrote: > >> BWTP is currently a thought experiment with lots of possible outcomes... > > Let's assume the desirable outcome is (c), a real protocol usefully > solving real problems. > > What I've missed for both BWTP and for WebSocket are clear statements > of those problems. Undocumented assumptions. Greg, let's collect > this for BWTP to start with: a solid list of the problems we are > aiming to solve. Then, we can examine alternative solutions, and that > gives us the argumentation to justify BWTP, and for implementors to > understand the cost/benefit tradeoffs that went into every decision. I started penning some BWTP requirements, and it grew a little large and became somewhat of a manifesto. So I'll post it in it's own thread. cheers
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.