Re: [tcpm] End to End Proprietary Information Field

At 01:22 p.m. 26/09/2008, Ish Shalom, Ran wrote:

>Thank you for your comments. I certainly agree with your stand that we
>should not make TCP proprietary. My proposal was not to make it
>proprietary but to assign an option to allow us to communicate local
>information (such as private IP addresses and local ports) end to end
>despite the many gateways that may change this information in the header
>fields.

A TCP option is still a header field, and packet scrubbers may simply 
remove that option.

That said, it doesn't look like clean design the approach you are 
describing (stuffing IP addresses in TCP, or applications dealing 
with IP addresses in the first place).

Kind regards,

--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

Re: [tcpm] End to End Proprietary Information Field - Request for a new TCP option