Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?

To: ext John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert at nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:22:42 +0300
Cc: Tony Finch <dot at dotat.at>, IETF-Discussion <ietf at ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <a06240871c314403a6108@[10.0.1.12]>
List-help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200709130810.l8D8A4mN067629@drugs.dv.isc.org> <46E92188.5070504@iglou.com> <2990.1189685347.711941@peirce.dave.cridland.net> <2098B1AA-19B6-4F99-BB7C-6A7631AFC628@virtualized.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709131942470.22434@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <823FD693-9B95-4602-8F49-6A4D7E7337CF@virtualized.org> <46E9A501.5040500@cavebear.com> <46E9A91E.5060507@cs.utk.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709141824180.22434@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <46EACB45.9000204@cs.utk.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709141944380.22434@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <58DE0D75-FB8A-4175-9E72-8E61703261E1@nokia.com> <5D732197-5621-4644-BD4F-8A681464B66E@cisco.com> <a0624086cc31411506244@[10.0.1.12]> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709171454220.22434@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <a06240871c314403a6108@[10.0.1.12]>

On 2007-9-17, at 17:40, ext John Day wrote:

Fast Select was a single packet that opened, transfered data, and closed a connection. The same as what Mr. Ford's description.

What you outline above is very different from SST. I'm surprised that after reading the paper you'd think that there are strong similarities.

Lars

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

References:
- Re: IPv6 will never fly: ARIN continues to kill it
  - From: Mark Andrews
- Re: IPv6 will never fly: ARIN continues to kill it
  - From: Jeff McAdams
- Renumbering
  - From: Dave Cridland
- Re: Renumbering
  - From: David Conrad
- Re: Renumbering
  - From: Tony Finch
- Re: Renumbering
  - From: David Conrad
- Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Karl Auerbach
- Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Keith Moore
- Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Tony Finch
- Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Keith Moore
- Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Tony Finch
- Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Lars Eggert
- Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Fred Baker
- Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: John Day
- Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: Tony Finch
- Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
  - From: John Day

Prev by Date: Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
Next by Date: RE: [Simple] Last Call: draft-ietf-simple-prescaps-ext (Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) User Agent Capability Extension to Presence Information Data Format (PIDF)) to Proposed Standard
Previous by thread: Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?
Next by thread: RE: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association thatspans transports?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: session layers, was Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.