First login?
Lost password?
 
 
sctp-discussion AT lists.franken.de 
SCTP Discussions

Text archives Help


RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP implementation


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Yiwen Jiang <Yiwen.Jiang AT tic.siemens.ca>
  • To: "'discussion AT sctp.de'" <discussion AT sctp.de>
  • Subject: RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP implementation
  • Date: Mon Mar 12 15:39:02 2001
  • List-id: SCTP Discussions <discussion.sctp.de>
> > I'm curious now... If SCTP was going to be directly on top
> of IP, wouldn't
> > it make sense for it to be in the kernel space? Or is that
> just not an
> > issue for your research interest?
>
> It would make sense, but is a LOT harder to implement !
> There is a lot of research - and corporate - interest on both, though.
>
What about the kernel implementation from http://www.sctp.refcode.org/ ? Is
there any relationship between you guys and them?

> Before you start writing a Diameter server, I suggest you get
> familiar with the SCTP :-)
I would like to do that... I only started working on Diameter a week ago!-(

I don't think one needed to know the fine details of TCP before one uses it
to implement a daemon... From your comment, it seems that one needs to
understand the nitty gritty of SCTP before doing Diameter then? What would
the reason behind this? Or did I misunderstood?

> Then you should start implemeting it. The current implementation
> will be in beta state, and will probably be released next week.
> And sufficient means a lot of different things for a lot of different
> people. Hey ! It is sufficient ! :-)
Thanks for the response! I'll have an eye out for the new release!

Cheers,

Yiwen


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Top of page