[IP] skype
Begin forwarded message:
From: Christian de Larrinaga <cdel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: June 23, 2006 5:05:27 AM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>, Bob2-19-0501@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] Digest 1.1054 for ip
Skype uses the "accidental" topology of the network as the platform
for its addressing. How else does it do it? But because Skype assumes
its users are likely not to have static IP addresses Skype has a way
to route to these users. It's P2P meshing is not a consequence of
this but a necessary party to making this possible.
There is also a potential cost to this as anybody who uses Skype
through a firewall knows as you open up undefined ports to unknown
hosts.
It would be so much easier to establish application level addressing
schema's including for Skype type services over an end to end
underlying addressing architecture. Being able to program one's way
out of trouble is clever but it is intelligent not to have to.
Christian de Larrinaga
Bob Frankston <Bob2-19-0501@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote.
On 23 Jun 2006, at 01:28, ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
You don’t want static IP addresses – that’s like putting a concrete
base on your cordless phone. Look at Skype as an example – it creates
its own stable addresses without tying them to the accidental
topology of the network. You get P2P meshing as an accidental
byproduct.
Where I do agree is that local traffic tends to be local and peering
is a business relic not a technology.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/