Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:16:04 -0400 From: Randall Stewart <randall@stewart.chicago.il.us> To: Marco Molteni <molter@tin.it> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <417A5994.7020306@stewart.chicago.il.us> In-Reply-To: <20041021213248.223cab2c.molter@tin.it> References: <4177C8AD.6060706@freebsd.org> <20041021153933.GK13756@empiric.icir.org> <4177E25E.804639E@freebsd.org> <20041021213248.223cab2c.molter@tin.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marco Molteni wrote: > On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> wrote: > > >>Bruce M Simpson wrote: >> >>>On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 04:33:17PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: >>> >>>>Thus after the removal of T/TCP for the reasons above I want to >>>>provide a work-alike replacement for T/TCP's functionality: >>> >>>I disagree. I think the time spent here would be better spent on >>>working on an import of SCTP into the kernel, perhaps the KAME code >>>base would be a good starting point. >> >>Is the SCTP in KAME complete and stable? Are there any other (open >>source) implementations of it? > > > SCTP in KAME is complete, stable and fully supported. > It is mainly developed by the SCTP RFC author, Randall Stewart. > > A T/TCP alternative as you are describing sounds very > similar to PR-SCTP (Partial Reliability SCTP). (Don't let the > name fool you, please read the internet draft). RFC3758 (its a proposed standard now.. not a draft.) :-> R > There is at least another kernel-level open source implementation, > for Linux, plus other user-level implementations. > > marco -- Randall Stewart 803-345-0369 <or> 815-342-5222(cell)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?417A5994.7020306>