I think underspecified choices like this have been controversial with our
implementers in the past.
E
On 02/07/2011 04:16 AM, Gerrit Renker wrote:
|> I have now implemented all the corrections in the UDP encaps draft,
|> except for the issue of how we implement transport demultiplexing,
|> where there seems to be multiple ideas.
|> We clearly need to choose either the 4-tuple demux or the 6-tuple demux.
|
| Indeed. I think there are three choices
|
| * 6-tuple
| * 4-tuple IP/UDP (with checks against conflicting DCCP connections)
| * 4-tuple IP/DCCP (with checks against conflicting UDP ports at UDP
decapsulation point)
|
For a user-space implementation all three choices would work. The
implementation would
be simpler if connection state need not be tracked (timeout after inactivity).
Would it be possible to specify the chosen suggestion as preferred
implementation, but leave it up to the implementers which concrete choice out
of the three above to choose (i.e. to provide guidance on demultiplexing, but
not a mandatory clause)?
