Phelan, Tom wrote:
Hi Gorry,
You've raised a couple of issues below that I think we could better keep
track of if we have a new thread, so I've renamed the subject here.
What I'd like to discuss here is the thought that we can have a generic
approach to UDP encapsulation of transport protocols. Since we have no
concrete approach on the table, it's a little difficult to comment, but
here are my thoughts on what I've heard bandied about.
One thing that I would like people to keep in mind is that DCCP is
likely to be deployed on lower processing power embedded systems than
SCTP or even TCP. Both of these have fairly heavy memory (both code and
data) requirements for real usages where DCCP can be quite a bit smaller.
In addition, checksum computation can be expensive on such machines.
Flagging that a checksum may not be valid is fine, but requiring that it
always be checked is not.
-a
