Eliot Lear wrote:
In thinking about this some more if we end up with a TCPMUX like
approach for TCP, how shall UDP, SCTP, et al be handled? Is it okay to
handle them differently?
I'm addressing this in the draft (in progress).
UDP can't support the idea; there's no option space.The alternative
would be to reserve a port and assume that bytes after the UDP header
always have the portname, but that seems like a bad idea (interferes
with the separation of header and data supported by DMA, e.g.)
SCTP and DCCP probably can handle a similar option, but that would be
addressed in separate documents.
Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf