Re: [Tsvwg] SCTP: new chunks definition

[Michael Tüxen <[e-mail]>]

On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:46 PM, Andrey Konstantinov wrote:

> Hi,
>
> If extend it for V-Tag resetting it could suit...
The problem remains: Why do you want this?
Without having a good reason why you want to change
the v-tag, I hesitating to put that into an ID.
It might be a good thing (then I would support adding
it), it might be a bad thing... Currently I see no
good reason why you want to change the v-tag...

Randy?
>
> Thanks, I'll take it into account.
>
> Best regards,
> Andrey Konstantinov
>
> 2009/3/2 Randy Stewart <[e-mail]>:
>> Andrey:
>>
>> Please go take a close examination of:
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stewart-tsvwg-sctpstrrst-01.txt
>>
>>
>> This already has a mechanism to do some of the things you are
>> interested in I think.
>>
>> R
>> On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:56 AM, Andrey Konstantinov wrote:
>>
>>> Dear experts,
>>>
>>> I am looking for the possibility to change local V-Tag of the
>>> association in run time without it's restart.
>>>
>>> The idea of the extension is following:
>>> Local SCTP asks remote SCTP to change V-Tag (firstly defined by  
>>> local
>>> side during start-up).
>>> I guess new chunk should be defined for this purpose. Remote side
>>> changes it and acknowledges the operation with help of another new
>>> chunk.
>>> INIT and INIT_ACK chunks are extended in order to negotiate  
>>> support of
>>> the feature during start-up.
>>>
>>> Could you point me out to a RFC or draft if a similar extension of
>>> SCTP has been already defined?
>>>
>>> If I am the first with such type of request could you provide me  
>>> input
>>> information how can we register, develop, review and approve this
>>> extension with IETF?
>>> The company which will possibly drive the development of the  
>>> extension
>>> is Ericsson and/or Tieto.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Andrey Konstantinov
>>>
>>
>> -----
>> Randall Stewart
>> [e-mail]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>