IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: UDP encaps for SCTP and SCCP

<L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk> Wed, 19 May 2010 06:36 UTC

Return-Path: <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43953A6ADB; Tue, 18 May 2010 23:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.73
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.73 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.545, BAYES_40=-0.185, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id njWByUt7vutb; Tue, 18 May 2010 23:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail72.messagelabs.com (mail72.messagelabs.com [193.109.255.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 407EA3A6A5B; Tue, 18 May 2010 23:36:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-4.tower-72.messagelabs.com!1274250999!12952722!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.31]
Received: (qmail 23653 invoked from network); 19 May 2010 06:36:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT011P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.31) by server-4.tower-72.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 19 May 2010 06:36:39 -0000
Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.1.69]) by EXHT011P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.31]) with mapi; Wed, 19 May 2010 07:36:38 +0100
From: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
To: lars.eggert@nokia.com
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 07:36:36 +0100
Subject: Re: UDP encaps for SCTP and SCCP
Thread-Topic: UDP encaps for SCTP and SCCP
Thread-Index: Acr3HaJ0n3K/Pwx7Q4G15CabMHM5Eg==
Message-ID: <D65C35D2-C8BC-4474-991A-56CD627E2927@surrey.ac.uk>
References: <9693C831-4EE4-4FC5-84A2-083DA16C1CD6@nokia.com> <F969C7A1-3ED7-4C93-B30A-27E513985932@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <F969C7A1-3ED7-4C93-B30A-27E513985932@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dccp@ietf.org, tsv-area@ietf.org, tsvwg@ietf.org, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 06:36:50 -0000

3. neither

(a solution for 2. already exists. It's called UDP tunnelling.)

On 18 May 2010, at 08:37, Lars Eggert wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> the discussion has touched on lots of things related to UDP encaps, but I haven't seen anything I'd call consensus on the question below. I'd therefore like to ask folks to specifically state which option they support:
> 
> (1) do one SCTP-specific and one DCCP-specific UDP encaps
> (2) do one generic UDP encaps that can be used with both
> (3) do neither (don't do any sort of UDP encaps for SCTP and DCCP)
> 
> Thanks,
> Lars
> 
> On 2010-4-22, at 12:57, Eggert Lars (Nokia-NRC/Espoo) wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> as most of you probably know, there are two different proposals for how to encapsulate SCTP and DCCP inside UDP.
>> 
>> One approach proposes two protocol-specific encapsulation schemes (described in draft-tuexen-sctp-udp-encaps and draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap).
>> 
>> The second approach proposes a generic encapsulation scheme that can be applied to both SCTP and DCCP (draft-manner-tsvwg-gut).
>> 
>> As a community, we do need to come to consensus on which of these two approaches we want to follow when it comes to UDP encapsulation of SCTP and DCCP. I believe it would be very confusing if we were to standardize both approaches.
>> 
>> I'd hence like to ask folks to read the three documents and post their views to the tsvwg@ietf.org list. I'm personally especially interested in hearing from folks who aren't on the author lists of the documents, but obviously, the authors expert opinions do matter.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Lars
>> 
>> PS: I'm pushing on this topic, because UDP encapsulation is the last remaining work item in the DCCP working group before it can close...
> 

Lloyd Wood
L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email