-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Lloyd Wood wrote:
> 
> On 5 Jun 2009, at 17:28, Joe Touch wrote:
>> Lloyd Wood wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5 Jun 2009, at 15:54, Joe Touch wrote:
>>>> Lloyd Wood wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> Do the internals of TCP change when it's running over IPv4 vs IPv6?
>>>>> Does the interface to upper layers change?
>>>>
>>>> Actually, yes - the pseudoheader over which the checksum is computed
>>>> channges. So too does ICMP signalling, setting of the DF bit for
>>>> fragmentation discovery (clearing it doesn't have the same effect in v6
>>>> as in v4), etc.
>>>
>>> ...so, by analogy, there's likely a need to describe HTTP over different
>>> transports, what is different, and what changes.
>>
>> Yes - I thought that's where they were going with the SCTP stuff.
> 
> Right. But are there more general 'HTTP over transport X' rules or
> conventions that need to be described?

I'd hope that a general decoupling would be useful, then a set of
mappings, one for each transport. That sort of regularity hasn't been
common - either in the IETF as a whole or in the past evolution of HTTP,
though ;-)

Are we trying to encourage them to do that, or just overseeing how it
evolves?

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkopVIQACgkQE5f5cImnZru7PACg31wGrLx1gwpynrSdaetHlsUp
SrsAn3eCBDifc+bsq6Ix/caVoU+niyT9
=M0wX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to