Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

Dear Michael, dear Andreas,

Please explain me the following statement that I have found in the SCTP
documentation:

"So far, there has been only one ULP instance. In the future, the
communication between SCTP and the ULP shall be done with a locally bound
UDP socket that will be used to register a ULP instance with the SCTP
instance. Thus it will be possible to asynchronously call functions of the
SCTP protocol engine from a process that sends data on a local UDP socket,
and is passed the results and other notification messages back over that
socket."

Best regards,
Marjan

---

• RE: [SCTP-Discussion] Off Topic - M2UA/M2PA open source, Tuexen Michael, 07/13/2001
  • [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Marjan Bozinovski, 07/13/2001
    • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Michael Tüxen, 07/13/2001
      • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Marjan Bozinovski, 07/14/2001
        • [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, Marjan Bozinovski, 07/14/2001
          • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, Michael Tüxen, 07/14/2001
            • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, Marjan Bozinovski, 07/14/2001
              • Re(2): [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, Michael Tüxen, 07/14/2001
              • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, M. Mueller, 07/15/2001
              • Re(2): [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, Michael Tüxen, 07/15/2001
              • Re: Re(2): [SCTP-Discussion] Unclear statement, M. Mueller, 07/16/2001
        • Re(2): [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Michael Tüxen, 07/14/2001
      • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Marjan Bozinovski, 07/18/2001
        • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Andreas Jungmaier, 07/18/2001
          • Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Path failure management, Marjan Bozinovski, 07/18/2001

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.