- From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:24:53 -0500
- To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
- Cc: William Chan (ιζΊζ) <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. Nico --
Received on Friday, 11 October 2013 16:25:17 UTC