On Jun 1, 2005, at 9:23 AM, Alex Tweedly wrote:
rfc1122 is a full IETF standard, and so the requirements it places on
host implementations of TCP are part or the official definition of TCP
...
A TCP MUST implement this algorithm.
That is an interesting interpretation.
I read that last sentence from RFC 1122 as meaning "A TCP must
implement this algorithm to comply with RFC 1122." A TCP is TCP if it
complies with RFC 793.
It seems you are saying that compliance with one IETF standard requires
compliance with all.
To me that contradicts the notion of all RFCs being valid standards but
some (for compliance) over-shadow others. One RFC cannot change
another. Any implementation that complies with an RFC will always
comply with it.
Even so, I need to get out of the dark ages. I was aware of Van
Jacobson, Korn & Partridge, and Nagle, but was blind to thinking of
these as standards.
(I had been interested in SCTP, and still am somewhat, but this has
slow start built-in. Just as PCI leaped to PCI Express to properly
handle congestion, I would have hoped SCTP would do the same for IP but
it uses the some methods as many TCP implementations. Can you imagine
communicating with the Mars Rover with slow start TCP?)
Dar
--
**********************************************
DSC (Dar Scott Consulting & Dar's Lab)
http://www.swcp.com/dsc/
A pig's gotta fly. -- Porco Rosso
**********************************************
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
