Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:14:59 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: Marco Molteni <molter@tin.it> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <417923F3.898EDBC8@freebsd.org> References: <4177C8AD.6060706@freebsd.org> <20041021153933.GK13756@empiric.icir.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). Yes, but it depends on SCTP and we don't have SCTP in the kernel any time soon. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?417923F3.898EDBC8>