Re: Loops (RE: CPIM changes)

Mark,


Wednesday, November 13, 2002, 10:16:49 AM, you wrote:
Mark> It has been a long-standing principle of IMPP, endorsed by the ADs, that the
Mark> goal of the WG is to produce a sound architecture for presence and instant
Mark> messaging

Perhaps we can focus on the particulars?

Nothing being discussed here leads to an unsound architecture. If you simply
want me to shut up, please say so directly rather than trying to promote a
view that the issues I am raising involve unsound architecture. I have been
very careful to point out the considerable basis for each suggestion I am
making.

We have experience doing gatewaying.  We should attend to its lessons.


Mark> It would be great to understand the impact of our design choices on those
Mark> deployed services, but to date we have not had a lot of luck in getting
Mark> credible analysis.

On the other hand, we certainly know that imposing end-to-end requirements
for non-core functions is likely -- for that matter, nearly certain -- to
require changes in existing end-systems.  At that point, this is not a
gatewaying effort, it is a relaying effort.  That's not what CPIM was
supposed to do.

d/
-- 
 Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email protected]>
 TribalWise <http://www.tribalwise.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850




  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]