[standards-jig] NEW JEP: Inband Bytestream (JEP-0047)
justin-jdev at affinix.com
Mon Sep 30 00:25:47 UTC 2002
> Instead of a sequence property, would it perhaps be easier to have a
> range property? No need for clients to keep track of non-sequenced
> packets and easier for clients that want to use pause/resume file
Since Inband-Bytestream is merely a transport protocol, a "range" value would
probably be outside of its scope.
I expect there to be a separate file transfer implementation that defines
those types of things, and would layer over IBB. I've actually written my
own such spec already, but have not converted it to a JEP yet.
> Why BASE64? Surely there are more compact encoding mechanisms?
> For example: http://b-news.sourceforge.net/
> I don't think this particular method would work in XML, but the theory
> behind it can be applied to have less than the 33% hit that BASE64 has.
Looks interesting. Can someone else comment on this?
More information about the Standards