[standards-jig] Pondering DTCP

Justin Karneges justin-jdev at affinix.com
Fri Dec 13 01:42:54 UTC 2002

On Thursday 12 December 2002 05:19 pm, Ben Schumacher wrote:
> submit to you that having to introduce a whole new state machine into
> clients to figure out if you have a direct connections to another
> client, establish the new connect, check for errors, etc., significantly
> increases the complexity of a client and goes against the Jabber Way.

This isn't a criticism to DTCP, but rather to whatever protocol were to ride 
over it.  In other words, some future JEP-0099 (c2c).

> Regardless, even if you tried to layer both chat and file transfer over
> the same connection, you're going to run into a slow of other problems,

I think you misunderstood here.  ICQ uses a new channel for each transfer.  I 
would do the same.  However, I think this is another discussion entirely.

> we do this when methods for this already exist. What you're suggesting
> here isn't a "Direct TCP" connection anymore, but port forwarding, and

Again, this isn't DTCP, but rather a possible use of it.

> I'm with stpeter, temas and Matthais on this one, I don't see any
> application where a new protocol is preferred over using something that
> is HTTP-based.

So why are we talking about all this other stuff when we could just be 
enhancing iq:oob ?


More information about the Standards mailing list