Bryan Ford <[email protected]> writes: > At any rate, to reiterate, having multiple TCP-ENO options floating > around in one TCP header and expecting different implementations to do > something sensibly consistent with them sounds terrifying, especially > when the common - and thus only well-tested - case will almost > certainly be only one option.
I'm not sure what you mean by "something" sensibly consistent. There is only one sensible thing to do, namely follow the well-defined behavior prescribed by the ENO draft, for which we will of course construct test cases. The main issue in this thread is middleboxes. That said, regardless of whether the final ENO document allows hosts to send more than one ENO option, the behavior of *receiving* multiple ENO options will have to be well-specified and tested in all implementations. David _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
