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

Text archives Help


RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP implementation


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Tuexen Michael <Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de>
  • To: "'discussion AT sctp.de'" <discussion AT sctp.de>
  • Subject: RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP implementation
  • Date: Wed Mar 14 09:18:01 2001
  • List-id: SCTP Discussions <discussion.sctp.de>
Dear all,
see my comments below.
Best regards
Michael

Michael Tuexen Tel.: +49 89 722 47210
Siemens AG Fax: +49 89 722 48212
ICN WN CS SE 51 E-mail:
Michael.Tuexen AT icn.siemens.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yiwen Jiang
> [SMTP:Yiwen.Jiang AT tic.siemens.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 9:30 PM
> To:
> 'discussion AT sctp.de'
> Subject: RE: [SCTP-Discussion] SCTP implementation
>
> Hi!
>
> > > Well SCTP is a transport protocol, so it essentially does similar
> > > things as TCP. However, there is (not yet) a socket API, so each
> > > implementation has sort of its own API (however most complete
> > > implemetations will adhere more or less to section 10 of RFC 2960)
> >
> > I would like to mention that there IS a draft API,
> > draft-stewart-sctpsocket-sigtran-02.txt.
> > The proposed API provides two alternative views.
> >
> > One view provides a TCP-style interface and is specifically designed
> > to make it easy to port TCP applications to SCTP.
> >
> > The other view provides a UDP-style interface. The UDP-style
> > interface is designed with extremely high traffic applications in
> > mind. It allows a single fd for hundreds of associations, and also
> > allows you to peel off a single association into its own fd. It is
> > very similar to current UDP, but there is an extra cmsghdr structure
> > which carries SCTP-specific information.
> >
> > Both views allow optional notifications of SCTP-related events. The
> > format of these events will probably change at least one more time.
> >
> I quickly went through that draft... But it seems to me that the API does
> not provide support for multi-stream from neither TCP-style nor UDP style
> API. So how can one utilize the multi-stream feature of SCTP using this API?
> Or did I mis-read some sections completely?
>
> Are all of these three APIs going to co-exist in the future?
[Tuexen Michael] I think that kernel implementations will use the
socket interface, userland implementations
may use the one described in RFC 2960.
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> discussion AT sctp.de
> http://www.sctp.de/mailman/listinfo/discussion


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Top of page