RE: Enough on TCP vs. SCTP, please

[Black_David@emc.com]

draft-wakeley-iscsi-msgbndry-00.txt says:

   The proposal is pretty simple.  The first byte of every iSCSI
   message is marked "urgent" - the TCP urgent pointer will point to
   the first byte of the iSCSI message in the TCP segment.

Douglas Otis says:

> It is not reasonable to redefine the urgent pointer.

Your WG co-chair says:

I can't find anything in the draft that redefines the urgent
pointer. TCP deliberately does not define exactly what the
urgent pointer points to.  For example, I wouldn't expect
iSCSI and telnet to use the urgent pointer in the same way.

In order to continue this argument that an unacceptable change
is being made to TCP, it is necessary to cite the text in RFC 793
(or some other RFC that defines TCP) that would have to be changed
if the approach in the draft referenced above were adopted.

NOTE: this is *not* a statement of consensus that the approach
in the draft should be adopted.  This is only a procedural statement
that consideration of that approach is within scope of the WG.

--David

---------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 435-1000 x75140     FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
---------------------------------------------------