Usage Agnostic Overlay Operation in RELOAD
draft-vidya-p2psip-usage-agnostic-reload-01
| Document | Type | Expired Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Vidya Narayanan | ||
| Last updated | 2008-11-20 | ||
| Stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats |
Expired & archived
plain text
htmlized
pdfized
bibtex
|
||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-vidya-p2psip-usage-agnostic-reload-01.txt
Abstract
RELOAD [1] defines an overlay framework for providing peer-to-peer connectivity and storage/retreival primitives for applications. Applications or usages are expected to reside on top of such an overlay. In general, this is a good design that allows multiple applications to use the same overlay framework. In such a design, however, there are some decisions to be made in terms of what is an overlay function and what must be defined by a usage. These decisions should generally be based on whether the particular function is expecting an operation or guarantee from the overlay nodes in general or from a particular usage only. This type of separation is especially crucial to avoid needing flag days for upgrading nodes in order to accommodate a newer usage version for performing the overlay operation.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)