From: Hugh Davis (H.C.Davis_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Fri 06 Jun 1997 - 03:35:50 CDT
This mail is specifically for the attention of Pete Nuernburg and Ken Anderson (because they have already expressed opions on this subject) but mailed to the list, as all replies are welcome.
I have had some trouble with this as people keep telling me that routing information should not be in the protocol. However I find that this information *does* need to be present,since the linkservice and the session manager actually have to look at this information at times.
Following a chat with Pete some time ago, Sigi and I have a proposal that contains a Session Id appended to all messages and this would be made up of the following information:
The linkservice must be able to understand 1 & 2, so they cannot be opaque. 3 and 4 need only be understood by the session manager which allocated them in the first place, so their form is unimportant.
We also find it necessary to carry a UserId on every message for authentication and to be ready to deal with later extensions for collaboration.
Comments would be welcome.
Hugh and Sigi.
Hugh Davis ( hcd_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk ) The Multimedia Research Group, ( http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~hcd ) Electronics and Computer Science, ( Room 1051, Building 16) University of Southampton, ( Tel: +44 (0)1703 593669 ) Southampton, SO17 1BJ, U.K. ( Fax: +44 (0)1703 592865 )
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue 13 Aug 2002 - 07:20:37 CDT