[ENet-discuss] Specification

[Ruud van Gaal]

A big effort, going for IEEE, but indeed outside of Lee's scope, except if
he was interested in that. ENet is a bit like TCP over UDP, though targeted
at games, so perhaps not broad enough for an IEEE spec.
And how about IPv6? If ENet doesn't support that, I'd think an IEEE attempty
would be futile (even though ENet would still be useful).

Ruud

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Lee Salzman <lsalzman1 at cox.net> wrote:

>  If other people want to organize the effort, that's fine. No problems with
> that here. I just can't promise to be part of the effort myself.
>
> Lee
>
>
> On 10/25/2010 12:42 PM, Tommi Laukkanen wrote:
>
> Hi
>
>  More throughout documentation is what would be of great help. If ENET
> protocol would be included in IEEE standard the documentation would be
> brushed up and it could deviate from ENET on the long run as it would be
> steered by the working group in charge of it. The working group could
> contain ENET developers if they would have interest in the work.
>
>  In current state it is hard for outsider to study ENET and create
> documentation from scratch. This is why I hope some of you would be
> interested in creating such wiki pages or other type of documentation.
>
>  I value ENET highly because of its accomplishments alone. Writing a well
> working networking stack like this is not easy and it has been optimized
> over the years.
>
>  Kind regards,
> Tommi Laukkanen
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ENet-discuss mailing list
> ENet-discuss at cubik.org
> http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cubik.org/pipermail/enet-discuss/attachments/20101026/3e35c074/attachment.html>