Subject: [p2p-sip] Updated concepts and terminology draft available

From: bryan at ethernot.org (David A. Bryan)
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:02:44 -0400

I've just completed updating the concepts and terminology draft to
revision -02. I ran out of time (I wanted folks on the list to get
time to look at this) and didn't get a chance to run it by all of my
co-authors, so I'll take responsibility for all stupid mistakes or
incorrect/controversial changes :)

Major changes are far better diagrams, and shortened terminology (we
don't always say "P2PSIP Overlay Whatever" but just "P2PSIP Whatever"
to make the terms a bit less of a mouthful. I've also tried to capture
and clarify as much of the mailing list discussion/confusion as I
could.

Thanks to Spencer for all the input and doing the ASCII art for me!

There will be a conference call Tuesday, Oct. 17 at 4pm Eastern time
to discuss edits to this draft. RSVP to Dean. His email announcing
this can be found here:

https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/p2p-sip/2006-October/001453.html

Until the newest version shows up the I-D archive, it can be found here:

http://www.p2psip.org/drafts/draft-willis-p2psip-concepts-02.html (or .txt)

Thanks,

David Bryan

---

From: swb at employees.org (Scott W Brim)
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:30:08 -0400

Where did we end up on "user" and "resource"?

I am not sure I can sort it all out but I believe I would completely
separate the two.

- Users are ultimate consumers, e.g. humans, and are not themselves
  resources.  

- Users _enroll_, and are authenticated based on enrollment
  information, but resources are what's directly visible in the
  overlay, not users.  

- When a resource joins the overlay the mapping between user and
  resource (e.g. something with an IP address) is not necessarily
  installed.  It can come later, if ever.  Therefore there are both
  resource records and user records and they may be distinct.  Also, a
  user can participate using multiple resources, and a single user
  agent may support multiple simultaneous users.  I think we need
  distinct concepts for both resource records and user records.  

So I would take "(user)" etc. out of the draft, and change "user" to
"resource" except in relation to enrollment, user agents, issues
around resources joining versus users authenticating, and a new
definition for user record separate from resource record.

I'll just launch that and see how it feels before proposing details.

Scott