- From: "S. Faizi" <sf8487 AT mindspring.com>
- To: <discussion AT sctp.de>
- Subject: Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Question about Ports negotiation with SCTP
- Date: Thu Apr 11 11:52:00 2002
- List-id: SCTP Discussions <discussion.sctp.de>
- Organization: na
----- Original Message -----
From: "Natalino Biundo"
<natalino.biundo AT marconi.com>
To:
<discussion AT sctp.de>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:01 AM
Subject: [SCTP-Discussion] Question about Ports negotiation with SCTP
>
Hi all,
>
>
First of all, I apologise for my question that may appear obvious to the
>
SCTP experts.
>
>
We are evaluating migration from TCP to SCTP in our embedded system based
>
on a Client/Server architecture.
>
>
Reading the RFC 2960 and several tutorials seems that, in order to
>
establish an association between two endpoints, the SCTP port number of
>
the Server must be known by the Client when initiates the association
and
>
never changes.
A server uses a well known port number regardless of transport layer.
>
>
On the contrary, TCP protocol requires a Server pre-defined port number
>
only during the association phase and allows to negotiate the Server
>
"working" port number to be used during the "stable connection" phase.
This has nothing to do with the Transport layer. What you are referring to
is a concurrent server where a server listens in on a well known port (e.g.
FTP has a well known port 21 specified in /etc/services). When a request
comes in, the server obtains an ephemeral port and forks a child (or use
threads) to handle the new connection, and continues to listen on its well
known port.
There is a proposed Socket API written by Randall Stewart et al that you may
find useful. This document is still a draft and can be obtained at
http://www.sctp.org/draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-01.txt.
>
>
The question is : Is something similar to the TCP behaviour possible
with
>
SCTP ?
Yes, please see above.
>
>
Many thanks in advance
>
>
Natalino Biundo
>
Marconi Mobile S.p.A
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.