W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features)

From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:24:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjbs8iZdegKNhaKkRR+ChPK2qGAbQ8QqdZ54EOTs+cueQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Cc: William Chan (ι™ˆζ™Ίζ˜Œ) <willchan@chromium.org>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
> On 9/4/2013 8:14 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
>> Things like SCTP over UDP will do.
> By your set of requirements, *anything* over UDP would work fine. Including
> IPsec, TCP-AO, and anything else you can dream up.

Well, not TCP-AO.   But, yes.

> Thank you for moving the stack up one level, adding 20 bytes of header, and
> constraining the number of connections between two hosts (due to the limit
> of port numbers).

As if it were my fault.  It's not.  Or as if blame for this can be
properly allocated.

And anyways, no, we could run lots of [end-to-end] things over UDP in
such a way that the port numbers from the UDP header need not be
repeated at higher layers.  But being able to use a single port for
lots of communications streams is useful to deal with the second
problem you note.

Received on Friday, 11 October 2013 16:25:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:18 UTC