Re: Drafting mux WG charter

From: Ben Laurie (
Date: Mon, Feb 22 1999

Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:07:37 +0000
From: Ben Laurie <>
Subject: Re: Drafting mux WG charter wrote:
> > Firewalls rely on knowing where traffic is
> > going. A MUXed protocol is likely to require inspection of every byte to
> > do this, or at least, reconstruction of the stream, if it is to be
> > noticably different from using multiple connections. This will make
> > firewalling almost impossible in hardware, and resource-intensive in all
> > circumstances.
> My vision of the solution is essentially another layer of packetization.  That is, fixed-length headers that include payload byte counts.  This is the same story as appears at lower layers in the IP stack, and so should be no more difficult for a firewall to handle.

But you layer on top of TCP, so stream reconstruction will be required.
This makes it considerably harder to handle.




"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
     - Indira Gandhi