Re: [IPFIX] RFC 5101bis: Changes to MTI transport protocol and security

Brian Trammell <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ipfix
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi, Gerhard,

Ah. I should have known that, sorry. Part of the argument for changing MTIs is the unimplementability of DTLS/SCTP, which Vermont would clearly seem to have disproven.

So if we do this, we will have to find a way to do so that does not make existing implementations non-compliant.

Thanks, cheers,

Brian

On Apr 2, 2012, at 11:00 PM, Gerhard Muenz wrote:

> 
> Brian,
> 
>>> What about implementations which already support DTLS/SCTP but not TLS/TCP? Will they become non-compliant?
>> 
>> Essentially, yes. (Are there currently working DTLS/SCTP implementations which don't support TLS/TCP?)
> 
> Vermont does not support TCP at all, but DTLS/SCTP on FreeBSD.
> 
> Gerhard

_______________________________________________
IPFIX mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.