JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
> Yes, anyone can basically raise their own requests at any time, but
> whether the requests are accepted or not depends on the timing...IMO,
> just saying "this could be useful" cannot be a reason to adopt the
> request at this stage, and, honestly, I don't see much benefit of
> the idea comparing to the status of the document. (But, of course, I
> may be wrong or be biased, so I'll hear from others' opinions for a
> while.)
I agree that my sole opinion is not enough to adopt a change.
> If you're implementing SCTP itself in the user space, I would point
> out that this API is not intended to aid implementing a transport
> layer protocol in the user space (at least in my understanding.) If
> you want to let an SCTP application accept ICMPv6 error messages, I'd
> say it's a so special case (even though this is the "advanced" API).
Actually, I am implementing it in both the kernel and user space.
In either location, the concept is still the same. In the kernel
(Solaris), I simply link the socket under the SCTP driver, in which
case I still only want ICMP error packets which are SCTP related.
--
David Lehmann Ulticom, Inc.
AOL/Yahoo IM: davidULCM 1020 Briggs Road
1-856-787-2729 Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
