[mnet-devel] EGTPv2 related

[Jim McCoy]

On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 02:01 PM, Zooko wrote:

>
>> Totally agree.  At this point in time, if it's a TCP based protocol
>> and it isn't built on SSL/TLS, it should pretty much be treated
>> as snake oil, I'd say.  Perhaps some kind of evangelism is needed.
>
> Yeah, it's really true.  *I* tend to treat any such protocol as snake 
> oil,
> unless it comes with a convincing explanation of why it is better than 
> SSL/TLS.
>

Does the setup and state maintenance costs for keeping a large amount 
of connections open and in-progress count? I am thinking of, to pick a 
random example, many-to-many communication that resembles UDP in 
payload size/frequency but which need some of the features that TCP 
offers.  In these cases you either end up rebuilding TCP mechanisms on 
top of UDP packets or tweaking the TCP-based protocol to strip out some 
of the unnecessary overhead. I am not saying that this is a 
"convincing" argument, and it is probably one that is getting to be 
less and less convincing as pipes get bigger and SSL toolkits/modules 
becomes simpler and more convenient to take advantage of, but there is 
still a point to be made for application-specific protocols.

Jim



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: eBay
Get office equipment for less on eBay!
http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5
_______________________________________________
mnet-devel mailing list
mnet-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mnet-devel