Re: list of user-visible goals

Paul,

I could care less if it is not consider.  Better for us! <g>

But lets keep an open mind.  The "few" that have IMPLEMENTED it are
providing valuable design and market experience.  I would had not mentioned
it otherwise.     If considered, it will alter IP "usage" functional
requirements in more generic terms. i.e., in our system, the client "Caller
ID" is the generic term used to identify the client "machine address"  based
on the type of connection.  Instead of calling GetSocketPeerAddress(), a
"GetCallerId()" function.  It will also help protocol designers to provide a
framework that is considered with the MANY possible implementations. Sure,
it is all virtualized so you don't need to go there to point this out,  but
I happen to believe direct-direct up will have a more important role in the
future. Hint:  VOIP!

-- 
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Crowley" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 3:50 AM
Subject: Re: list of user-visible goals


>
> "Hector Santos" <[email protected]> writes:
> > o Users want to do NON-SOCKET access, dialup directly.  Note:  Some
Federal
> > security mandates may require it.
>
> You mean they want to access it without using IP?  That's always going
> to be possible if someone designs the protocol and implements the
> client and server, and I don't believe it's something we should put
> any effort into - let those few who need it work it out when the time
comes.
> -- 
>   __  Paul Crowley
> \/ o\ [email protected]
> /\__/ http://www.ciphergoth.org/
>
>