RE: Loops (RE: CPIM changes)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Crocker [mailto:[email protected]]
>
> The group of nine was commissioned to specify a common 
> gateway semantic. That is all. Not a protocol. Not a content
> syntax. But rather the minimum acceptable gateway
> functionality that could pass muster among the group of nine.

Huh. Derek's presentation to IPMM at the time [1] seemed to
indicate otherwise. While syntactic transformations were
allowed, discussions in the meeting [2] further clarified
that the syntactical translations had to be losslessly
reversable. A comparison to lossless compression was
made for clarity. Various consensus polls (documented in
the minuted) confirmed that the group backed up this
viewpoint.

These reversible-syntax-transformation transitions do not
fit the definition of heterogeneous gateways that has been
discussed recently. It's not like transforming from DECmail
to SMTP; it's more like sending SMTP through a gateway that
compresses it.

/a

[1] http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/00dec/slides/IMPP-2/sld001.htm
[2] http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/00dec/00dec-16.htm



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