From: "Arnaud SAHUGUET" <sahuguet@lucent.com>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Article in the Economist about Bill Joy
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 11:00:16 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <03c101c26a24$7d0742f0$6601a8c0@bl.belllabs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f90422a347a13bdb49de81385ebd576e@centurytel.net>
I played with JXTA over a year ago.
I don't see anything revolutionary here.
The main components are:
- a discovery protocol, which is neither smart nor efficient. But people can
provide their own if they want. Most deployed architecture are not pure P2P
because they use some central servers keeping track of the various nodes.
- a suite of services that can be used by the applications built on top of
JXTA (e.g. persistent store, etc.)
- a message-based mechanism (based on XML) to describe the wiring between
nodes (pipes)
- code on demand when they are using Java (but JXTA is not Java specific)
I think that a good way to see how revolutionary JXTA is is to look at the
applications built on top of it. For most (if not all) of them, it is
reinventing the wheel.
regards,
Arnaud
----- Original Message -----
From: "Skip Tavakkolian" <fst@centurytel.net>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:03 AM
Subject: [9fans] Article in the Economist about Bill Joy
> Sep 21st issue of The Economist has a technology article about Bill
> Joy and the latest in the alphabet soup that starts with J, namely
> JXTA. Since it was the second time I heard about JXTA, I decided to
> read up on it. Maybe I'm oversimplifying or maybe I'm sleepy, but it
> seems that Sun has finally abandoned the CORBA/DCOM notions of object
> discovery/brokering for distributed systems (at least ad-hoc P2P variety)
and
> coming around a set of protocols for some basic services.
>
> In all sincerity, I want to know what is revolutionary about JXTA?
> If you are wondering how this relates to Plan9, anything that claims
> to be the panacea for distributed computing needs to get compared
> to Plan9, which we all know IS ☺
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-02 15:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-02 4:03 Skip Tavakkolian
2002-10-02 15:00 ` Arnaud SAHUGUET [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='03c101c26a24$7d0742f0$6601a8c0@bl.belllabs.com' \
--to=sahuguet@lucent.com \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).