ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TCPMUX (RFC 1078) status

2013-08-22 02:45:15
On 21/08/13 19:00, Joe Touch wrote:

So what would you use for muxing, if TCPMUX is not a good idea?

You need to roll your own. The requirements of systems vary widely, as
do the costs/benefits of different approaches.

I listed a few before, but here's a more comprehensive list:
     - service per message
         demux based on message ID
         use IPC (interprocess comm) to handoff internal
         to your system

     - service per connection
         demux based on the first message in an
         association (TCP or UDP), and either continue to
         forward messages to a different process or handoff
         the connection

So, if I proceed with this option why not use RFC1078 to implement it? Why write a new RFC if there's an old one that fits the bill?


     - subservice on different ports
         determine what subservice you want to initiate,
         start it on an ephemeral port, and indicate the
         port number in-band (e.g., as with FTP and others)

Martin

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>