HI, I was thinking about the PUSH flag mainly.
In our socket api implementation we do not allow for set of PUSH in send calls nor do we provide the PUSH flag indication upwards on the receiver side. I think that after RFC793 it has been clarified that TCP MAY allow for set of PUSH flag in send() and MAY OPTIONALLY provide this information upwards on the receiver side. I think that it would be questionable to follow RFC793 wording here on PUSH. I have no much experience with the URGENT flag - we actually don't support it, which I agree to be non-compliant. Perhaps the API parts of RFC793 is right, whereas it is only the function as such that has been clarified later. BR, Karen >-----Original Message----- >From: Taps [mailto:taps-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joe Touch >Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 8:18 PM >To: Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen; Mirja Kühlewind >Cc: Brian Trammell; taps@ietf.org; Michael Welzl; to...@isi.edu >Subject: Re: [Taps] TCP components > > > >On 7/15/2015 2:03 AM, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen wrote: >> HI Mirja, All >> >> Sorry for jumping late into this discussion. >... >> I really do not think that it makes much sense to look into outdated >> and deprecated APIs as specified in RFC793 and RFC4960 when we have >> better material available. > >What portion of RFC793's API do you consider outdated? > >AFAICT, it's exactly what most sockets try to support (I can't speak about >SCTP, as I haven't used it much). > >Joe > >_______________________________________________ >Taps mailing list >Taps@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
