[BXXPwg] Agenda for 12/14 meeting

Keith McCloghrie kzm@cisco.com
Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:17:03 -0800 (PST)

I'll add it to the agenda.

> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> BXXPwg mailing list
> BXXPwg@lists.invisible.net
> http://lists.invisible.net/mailman/listinfo/bxxpwg