Re: Definition of the pres: URI in impp-pres-01

Derek,

Tuesday, January 21, 2003, 2:38:52 PM, you wrote:
DA> I see no reason why notifications cannot be "multicast", or at least
DA> "multi-announced".  Similarly, I see no reason why I couldn't
DA> subscribe to muliple presentities in one message...

Here are two, fundamental reasons:

1. This is supposed to be a minimal system, and that means that the
argument "I see no reason why we should not add this feature" is
exactly the wrong criterion. The proper criterion is supposed to be
"The system will not function without this."

2. Multicast is difficult. One could rather easily argue that
large-scale protocol infrastructure that relies on serious multi-cast
-- where there is a logical single entity that is handled as an
aggregation of sub-entities -- is still a research topic. For example,
large-scale acknowledgement of multicast packets does not have an
existence proof, as far as I am aware. Research is not the goal of
this working group.


DA> Besides, I was mostly talking about syntax, not semantics.  Perhaps the
DA> semantics are confusing, but the syntax I had in mind was definitely
DA> of the form pres:xxx, pres:yyy

Then the syntax needs to show repetition as a characteristic of the
header, not the core address construct.



d/
-- 
 Dave <mailto:[email protected]>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850




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