Re: [dccp] WGLC for draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap

[Randy Stewart <[e-mail]>]

Cullen:

(not having read the draft.. :0)

Your idea makes me wonder... would that not also pollute the UDP port space? After all then
you are burning a UDP port for every DCCP (or am I mis-understanding you)? If not this
seems a waste..

R
On Mar 2, 2011, at 4:35 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

> 
> I'm wondering what would be the downside of saying the UDP source / dest port had to match the DCCP source and dest port?  This would make it much easier to figure out hot to integrate this into something like ICE or decide what UDP and DCCP ports one uses for a URL like sip:example.com:5060
> 
> 
> On Feb 28, 2011, at 2:09 AM, Pasi Sarolahti wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> We just started DCCP WG last call on draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap that specifies UDP encapsulation for DCCP packets (see pointer below). The issue of UDP encapsulation was discussed earlier also on this list, so people might be interested to read the draft. Please send comments to the DCCP mailing list <[e-mail]> by March 11.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> - Pasi
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Pasi Sarolahti <[e-mail]>
>>> Date: February 25, 2011 12:56:46 PM GMT+02:00
>>> To: 'dccp' working group <[e-mail]>
>>> Subject: [dccp] WGLC for draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> This mail starts a working group last call for the UDP encapsulation draft. The draft is available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap-06 . Please read the draft and send any comments to the DCCP mailing list.
>>> 
>>> The WGLC lasts for two weeks, until March 11.
>>> 
>>> - Pasi
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-----
Randall Stewart
[e-mail]