3 ms·
Calling this IPv8 seems pretty irresponsible when it is not an IETF standard in any way.
by pythonaut_16 6y ago
Calling this IPv8 seems pretty irresponsible when it is not an IETF standard in any way.
- imoverclocked 6y agoSo much this. Please don't call this IP. We already have an Internet Protocol and this project seems to work as a layer on top of it, much like a P2P-VPN.
- synctext 6y agoDetails and explanation in this expired IETF Internet Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pouwelse-trustchain-01.html https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pouwelse-trustchain-01.html
- abvdasker 6y agoI find it funny and irreverent. There probably never will be an IPv8 so there's no need to worry about a naming conflict.
- wyldfire 6y agoI'm all for funny names but this one seems like it would just cause more confusion than it's worth. The fact that they list it as the sole FAQ probably means that many folks have been confused. I hereby request that they change the project name to one of the not-too-perilous-but-frequently-selected-references-to-Monty-Python for a very silly name indeed.
- ACAVJW4H 6y agoLike calling your own totally independent and unrelated implementation of a neural network yolo.v5 This is just clickbait.
- omginternets 6y agoThis, along with the lack of an RFC (see my top-level comment) seals my judgement of this project as mere content marketing. IMHO, the libp2p specifications [0] are much more interesting. [0] https://libp2p.io/ https://libp2p.io/
- LargoLasskhyfv 6y agoMaybe they mean layer 8 ;)