[firstname.lastname@example.org: RE: [E-Lang] A more critical question (was: an example impatience policy )]
Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:02:00 -0800
> MarkM wrote:
> > I think it would be great to separate out the VLS ideas
> > into a separate
> > HTTPY (or whatever we call it) service. Steve Jenson has
> > expressed an
> > interest in reviving the VLS, and we've talked some about
> > how a revived VLS
> > should deal with Firewalls, NATs, delayed lookup, and
> > activation.
> I think it would be good if this discussion moved onto the e-lang
> list. I imagine that Mojo Nation also needs/uses a DNS replacement
> (Zooko?). If there were a consensus amoung E, Mojo, Droplets, Steve's
> needs, etc. around what the VLS should be, then such a generally
> useful product could get significant market share.
Yes, I certainly have expressed an interest in reviving the VLS.
I'm not sure of the timeframe, as it'll require me to dig back into Java
networking (which is simple compared to writing socket code in say,
C or Perl) and also requires me to get up to snuff coding E internals
(which I'm looking forward to). Regardless, it needs to happen and
there's no reason that I can't do it.
I've talked with damien stolarz of static regarding what they were doing
for penetration of double-NAT/firewalls and they're tunneling connection
brokerage info through UDP packets.
Of course, most firewalls block UDP packets by default, so I suggested
tunneling payloads in ICMP echo_reply packets but this wouldn't fit our
needs as Java is unable to read/write ICMP. perhaps some JNI wizardry
would be useful but not portable.
steve jenson <email@example.com> http://sieve.net/
PGP key found at a PKI near you (http://pki.surfnet.nl)
PGP fingerprint: 79D0 4836 11E4 A43A 0179 FC97 3AE2 008E 1E57 6138