Re: [tsvwg] SCTP NAT support, draft-stewart-natsupp-tsvwg-00

["Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[e-mail]>]

Magnus,

Magnus Westerlund wrote:                     (Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:50:26)
> > 
> > On a related note: is RFC 4960 or SCTP ever going from PS to DS?
> > 
> 
> A good question. There are I think primarily two questions. To what
> extent is the Normative references of a status of DS or FS? (A certain
> amount of exceptions can be handled)
> 
> Then there is the question of Implementation reports. All functionality
> in SCTP needs to have been implemented in at least two different
> code-bases and be tested against each other. This needs a written
> report, please see RFC 5657 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5657/
> for more info.

<rant>
Nowadays you use SCTP just about every time you make a phone
call.  SIGTRAN deployment (another set of PS RFCs) is poised to
overtake SS7 in deployment for heaven's sake.  Certainly the
requirements of RFC 2026 and RFC 5657 can be met by surveying
the widespread existing implementations and weeding out any
esoteric optional things (such as, perhaps, hostname in INIT).
Considering its widespread production deployment with SIGTRAN, I
find it amazing that it is not yet a full Internet Standard,
especially when compared to a lackadaisical work like SIP which
has long enjoyed full Internet Standard status.
</rant>

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[e-mail]
http://www.openss7.org/