At 05.30 +0000 00-06-26, Mohsen BANAN-Public wrote:
> >> IETF/IESG/IAB folks keep saying TCP is good enough for everything.
>
> Patrik> We don't.
>
> Patrik> See for example SCTP described in draft-ietf-sigtran-sctp-09.txt and
> Patrik> applied to many applications which for example have to do with
> Patrik> telephony signalling.
>
>The current status, state and beginning date of that example
>makes my point.
You are extrapolating the time it takes to get consensus around a
document in a working group with people stating that TCP is good
enough?
>After 7 months of delay, caused by the IESG, ESRO was published
>as an RFC in Sept. 1997.
There have already been enough discussions on the IETF list about
ESRO. See the archives.
You seem to (once again) ignore the problems with making protocols
interoperate.
The rest of this discussion exists in the IETF mailing list archives.
> - Equal access to RFC Publication Service
This is not possible, as a review process is guaranteeing the quality
of the work published. For the various tracks, different reviews are
done. For informational (such as ESRO) the RFC-Editor is deciding
whether something is good enough, and asks for input from the IESG.
Issues which were discussed heavily regarding your two protocols are:
- Congestion control
- Ability to gateway to/from existing standards
- Internationalization issues
- Security
See IESG note in the beginning of RFC 2524.
All new protocols have to address those issues, as the experience we
have with the protocols we have today gives that those issues
(probably) were not addressed enough in those. Because we made that
mistake once, we don't want to make the same mistake again. So, the
IESG asks all people which write new protocols to address the issues
above (and some others).
So, regarding the protocols you have proposed, it is not the case of
"better or worse than TCP", it is about "does the protocols proposed
address all issues we _today_ think a new protocol have to fulfil.
That doesn't say that the protocols we use today would pass if
created today. We should though not swap from something bad into
another thing not solving the problems we know exists.
Regards, Patrik
