IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Spud] SPUD's open/close are unconvincing

Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch> Thu, 09 April 2015 14:27 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@trammell.ch>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D4D1A6F33 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 4g54cTrYa2KR for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:27:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trammell.ch (trammell.ch [5.148.172.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B2B1A1BCF for <spud@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:27:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:10ec:2a49:8000::b9] (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:10ec:2a49:8000::b9]) by trammell.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76D0A1A0111; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:27:08 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FA2BC258-6A84-4A97-9D6E-4C56D5806641"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwgaezT3mzbJQptrL2b7w=e7ubEdohsUoTxsFXgGzcDgJA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:27:07 +0200
Message-Id: <DCB37ACE-C442-4236-9919-85E18EE160B2@trammell.ch>
References: <87iod631nv.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <DM2PR0301MB06555C7D7F32A69214405D44A8FC0@DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <20150408193920.GD24286@cisco.com> <871tju2rdq.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net> <20150409012229.GG24286@cisco.com> <CALx6S35NH9yPZxeARTic10b0jFEi8aC4Gmt79cxuzF_VpYYqLA@mail.gmail.com> <20150409041507.GJ24286@cisco.com> <CAMm+LwgD8Foe=JdJvZ4oeuhGkJJvUaNOsCJATGDsRmBwN4en_w@mail.gmail.com> <20150409135509.GK24286@cisco.com> <CAMm+LwgaezT3mzbJQptrL2b7w=e7ubEdohsUoTxsFXgGzcDgJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/s4MrtIgq88o8RGTKag94Yl1gZk0>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, "spud@ietf.org" <spud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] SPUD's open/close are unconvincing
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:27:13 -0000

> On 09 Apr 2015, at 16:09, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
> 
>>> When TCP was designed, the mantra was 'everything is a stream'. That
>>> was the right abstraction for Telnet and FTP and Mail. It is probably
>>> not the right abstraction for real time web where an unreliable
>>> sequence of chunks seems a better fit.
>> 
>> What's missing from SCTP ?
> 
> Quite, do we have the opportunity for a quick fix here? If SCTP has
> already done all the necessary design work, can we just bolt that on
> top of UDP in place of IP and declare a quick victory?
> 
> Worth a look to see...

RFC 6951, though it uses a single well-known port for all encapsulated SCTP so is less suitable for userland implementations. You can stick DTLS on top of SCTP (RFC 6083) if you're okay exposing the transport headers, or SCTP on top of DTLS as in WebRTC data channels if not.

Cheers,

Brian

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email