Subject: RE: Does the current CPA/CPP spec support multi-hop?
That's very much what I want to say. In the case of the eth-ppp, the hub can be configured from outside. It does not behave differently in different situations, at least from an external point of view: it moves packets from the LAN to the phone and viceversa. This is what I called "mechanical". This is, in my mind, a hub, not a partner. But if the behaviour of this actor depends on the trading partner agreement and if it cannot be configured in a mechanical way, then it starts to become a partner more than a hub /Stefano » -----Original Message----- » From: Devendra Tripathi [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] » Sent: 01 February 2001 00:04 » To: Stefano POGLIANI; Philippe DeSmedt; 'Burdett, David'; Martin W » Sachs; email@example.com » Subject: RE: Does the current CPA/CPP spec support multi-hop? » » » Stefano, » » > - In my modest opinion, multi hop is when the Hub really does not do » > anything » > else than acting as a middle point, without translation nor change in » > the protocol semantic. In my opinion what you both describe is » > a situation » > where the Hub does much more than that: at least it implements a » > rudimental » > state machine to twist things from the sender to the receiver. » » » I do not see this much different than a Gateway which converts » (but is not a » source of) » the incoming packet to outgoing including the protocol (like ppp to » Ethernet). If » we take that analogy, the Hub could be viewed in that way. Is » there any loss » or » complicacy in following that model ? » » Regards, » Devendra Tripathi » VidyaWeb, Inc » »
eList eXpress LLC