Interesting People mailing list archives
skype
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:36:32 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Christian de Larrinaga <cdel () firsthand net> Date: June 23, 2006 5:05:27 AM EDT To: David Farber <dave () farber net>, Bob2-19-0501 () bobf frankston com Subject: Re: [IP] Digest 1.1054 for ipSkype 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 () bobf frankston com>wrote. On 23 Jun 2006, at 01:28, ip () v2 listbox com 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 accidentaltopology 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 lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- skype David Farber (Jun 23)