[BXXPwg] Agenda for 12/14 meeting

Marshall T. Rose mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us
Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:38:13 -0800


> Whats the point of multicast mapping? Isn't this confusing BXXP
semantically?
>
> Doesn't BXXP rely on *a* peer talking to *a* peer? How can multiple peers
> responding to a multicast MSG message keep frame sequence numbers
coordinated,
> for example (I can think of several other issues).
>
> Or am I not understanding what you are proposing?

i think it would be useful to have a discussion on what functionality a
beep-like framework for multicast applications should have.

one of the selling points of beep is that it's an integrated framework for
peer2peer/client-server application protocols. it doesn't so much invent
stuff, rather it combines best practices.

i think it's reasonable to ask for a similar framework for multipeer
application protocols. although the topic is outside the charter of the
existing working group, given the informal basis for the san diego meeting,
i think it would be good to visit. in particular, i'm interested in how many
people are interested in the pragmatic single sender/multiple receiver
multicasting model vs. the fully-generalized model.

keith - can i ask that you add this discussion to the agenda (say for 15-20
mins).

dan - it would be useful if you came to meeting with a couple of slides
talking about your requirements for a multipeer framework!

/mtr