RE: Re: Standalone xPL Hub Summary, Mark II

["Ian Lowe" <ian.lowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmmm.

I'd avoid any substantial changes to the environment here - let's bear
in mind that (apart from the odd "no-hub" issue some of us are
seeing,
this has been a nice solid environment for a good couple of years now.

One thing -

> With built-in hubs, the application was free to assume that a hub
would be available.
> With a stand-alone hub, that will change.

I don't think so - to my mind, the application should act as if there is
a hub present anyway. I think that an app should *always* assume that a
hub is present and in essence, not give it any other thought.

One thing also - the suggested timings have to be worded as "suggested
values", not as a protocol breaking rule. There would be a lot of work
involved in re-writing existing code, and I think that time would be
better spent on new developments!

Ian.