IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB Data Channel: Usage of PPID for protocol multiplexing

"Makaraju, Maridi Raju (Raju)" <Raju.Makaraju@alcatel-lucent.com> Wed, 05 February 2014 22:34 UTC

Return-Path: <Raju.Makaraju@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 159C71A0266 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 14:34:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J571l-kefUbr for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 14:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E7741A021F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 14:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us70tusmtp1.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-5-2-63.lucent.com [135.5.2.63]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s15MYKH0017205 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:34:21 -0600 (CST)
Received: from US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.48]) by us70tusmtp1.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s15MYKx3014250 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:34:20 -0500
Received: from US70UWXCHMBA02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.8.212]) by US70UWXCHHUB01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.48]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:34:19 -0500
From: "Makaraju, Maridi Raju (Raju)" <Raju.Makaraju@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] RTCWEB Data Channel: Usage of PPID for protocol multiplexing
Thread-Index: AQHPIrbvBV3Y4lbqJU6LVDbjTFGdqpqnLPhQgABZLwD//7hz0A==
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 22:34:20 +0000
Message-ID: <E1FE4C082A89A246A11D7F32A95A17826DFCD881@US70UWXCHMBA02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D15BD1A@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <CAJrXDUGJO1C-47PmU7nwgRaZu19XTvsgwyq=6m=-vsL6LYqqLA@mail.gmail.com> <E1FE4C082A89A246A11D7F32A95A17826DFCD56D@US70UWXCHMBA02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAJrXDUGtf4U_jhX1hmbPTtXQidR=oHL0cCrKCaZhnLsQd8NvLw@mail.gmail.com> <A9D7F81A-C0E6-44DF-AFC4-4AAB1E78DA19@lurchi.franken.de> <E1FE4C082A89A246A11D7F32A95A17826DFCD683@US70UWXCHMBA02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> <CFF06852-E7C6-4A9D-A15B-D79F45D24834@lurchi.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <CFF06852-E7C6-4A9D-A15B-D79F45D24834@lurchi.franken.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.5.27.17]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB Data Channel: Usage of PPID for protocol multiplexing
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 22:34:25 -0000

> > [Raju] Can I then assume the reason for such removal is the availability
> of NDATA (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-stewart-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-03)
> sooner than later, which will make such PPID based fragmentation/reassembly
> immediately obsolete?
> Right. The point was not to have two solutions, but use one.
[Raju] That makes perfect sense and NDATA is a better solution too! That also pushes browser vendors to support NDATA sooner than later.

-Raju

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email