Re: [ledbat] list of reasons for needing multiple TCP connections

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Caitlin Bestler wrote:
> Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>> As was mentioned in the IAB plenary yesterday, a reason to not use
>> multiple TCP connections is the possible exhaustion of middlebox (read
>> NAT) resources, such as state memory or port numbers. So if you are
>> going to use multiple connections in parallel, you may wish to include
>> a method for the user to control that behavior, and a way to detect
>> that you're behind a NAT and adapt appropriately.
>>
> 
> The gotcha here is that every item in the list Joe supplied is
> already solved by SCTP, and about the only legitimate reason
> for not using SCTP is the presence of middleboxes that do
> not support it.

SCTP doesn't address the need for different applications to have
different connections (one variant of the demultiplexing issue). I.e., a
single socket used by more than one application.

SCTP also doesn't address the need to support endpoints that don't speak
SCTP yet, or services that aren't defined over SCTP yet.

FWIW, many of these issues were similarly addressed by HTTP 1.1, and in
other applications as well.

Joe

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkkl3J4ACgkQE5f5cImnZrto8ACg3eVYF/VAU2hI6oKyYqLYJG1R
oCcAn2XAWrtp6OhNValUHmF5DoL89oiu
=4EpB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
ledbat mailing list
ledbat@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ledbat