Re: [Dime] RFC 3588 (Diameter Base Protocol) - Section 2.1.1. SCTP Guidelines

[Stefan Winter <[e-mail]>]

Hi,
 
> For me I think message ordering and/or delivery is an implementation
> issue (and hence SCTP stream assignments/usage as well). There are
> many ways to go about this (ordered global rx queues, per-session
> queues ... etc) and all of the depends on how you architecture your
> implementation. This is a good reason not to have it in a protocol spec.
>

I don't quite understand that. If you leave the decision of message
ordering to the implementation, you can easily run into one
implementation sending its transactions unordered or in different
streams, while the implementation on the other end expects them to come
in ordered and in the same stream. This will lead to poor/no
interoperability between the two implementations. I'd consider this
property to be part of the spec. At the very least, it should be spec'd
that the receiving end MUST be prepared to handle out-of-order or
cross-stream transactions.

Greetings,

Stefan Winter

-- 
Stefan WINTER
Ingenieur de Recherche
Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et de la Recherche
6, rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi
L-1359 Luxembourg

Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]