Subject: RE: [Tsvwg] RFC2960bis

From: "Ong, Lyndon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 10:18:42 -0700

LaMonte,

It's a bit too early to decide on this feature, I think.  There will
be the opportunity when we move SCTP from Proposed Standard to Draft
Standard, assuming that we get there.

At this point, we should be focusing on fixing bugs, like the
checksum problem.

Cheers,

Lyndon

-----Original Message-----
From: La Monte Henry Piggy Yarroll [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:43 AM
To: Ong, Lyndon
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] RFC2960bis 

The HOSTNAME parameter in INIT still has not been tested at a
bakeoff.  A few implementations claimed that they could handle it, but
no implementation has come to a bakeoff which has been able to
generate one.

May we drop the feature with the bis?  There are other solutions to
getting SCTP across NAT's.

> Folks,
> 
> Due to the checksum issue, we are planning to reissue RFC2960 with a revis
ed
> error check algorithm (the particular check mechanism still to be decided)

_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg