RE: [Tsvwg] Last Call: The UDP Lite Protocol to Proposed Standard (32-bit CRC - 16-bit Stream)

All again,

As yet another crazy idea, should UDP-Lite adopt 32-bit CRC (Hopefully
SCTP's and similarly  iSCSI's.), the extra 16-bit field could use the SCTP
multiplexor: Stream. ; )

  -Doug

On May 7, 2002 3:23 PM Douglas Otis (dotis@sanlight.net) wrote:
>
> All,
>
> There has been interest within the RDMA group to impose separate
> Header and Payload checks as a means to reduce the size of a FIFO
> to handle Payload placement.  Should there be a problem detected
> within the payload, the point in time where this is handled can
> be delayed provided Header information is known to be correct
> before hand.  This information deals with attributes such as
> Buffer ID, Offset, and Length.  The simple checksum proposed for
> UDP-Lite would not allow an adequate level of assurance for such
> use.  Why is such a weak level of checking being used?  This would
> seemly miss a useful application employing this approach.  It
> would also mean there would be an extra 16-bit field created if a
> 32-bit CRC were used.
>
>  -Doug
>
>
> > The IESG has received a request from the Transport Area Working
> > Group Working Group to consider The UDP Lite Protocol
> > <draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-lite-00.txt> as a Proposed Standard.
> >
> > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> > final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
> > iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by May 15, 2002.
> >
> > Files can be obtained via
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-lite-00.txt
> >

_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
tsvwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg