[standards-jig] JEP 65 - Bytestreams

Daniel Chote daniel at chote.net
Fri Dec 20 05:50:56 UTC 2002

As a client developer I agree... Its not that big of a deal to implement 
DTCP.. it just takes motivation.... Plus, even though there are miriads 
of libs for SOCKS5 about.. there is nothing that I am easily able to use 
in my client.. so, like everything ive done so far, I would still have 
to code it from a spec somewhere *from scratch*.

Justin Karneges wrote:

>On Thursday 19 December 2002 03:55 pm, Ben Schumacher wrote:
>>The 'connect in both directions simultaneously' mechanism does not
>>ensure that the TCP connection sets up quickly, just like Diz said.
>>Actually, on low bandwidth connections (maybe even the hardware in
>>embedded systems -- I don't have enough experience with these), I
>>wouldn't be surprised if it slows down the amount of time it takes to
>>establish a TCP connection.
>This can be solved by the implementation for that scenario.  Implementations 
>of DTCP do not necessarily _have_ to connect at the same time, and providing 
>hosts is optional by either the initiator or target.
>>I don't understand your logic, or Justin's, for that matter. You have
>>both regularly stated that DTCP is an easier protocol to implement, yet
>>you continually reject complaints from *client developers* that disagree
>>(namely, PGM and DizzyD).
>Have they tried to implement either spec for fair comparison?  After coding 
>DTCP and reading JEP-65, I'd say they are about the same in difficulty, but 
>that is just my opinion.
>Standards-JIG mailing list
>Standards-JIG at jabber.org


*. Daniel Chote*
email/jabber: daniel at chote.net
web: www.chote.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20021220/0e452c70/attachment.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list