Re: Review of GIST over SCTP and DTLS - updated

Hi Xiaoming,

Maybe I'm not getting it, but how do you differentiate in the proposal

1. SCTP
2. SCTP with DTLS security
3. DCCP with DTLS security

If DTLS is it's own MA ID, then you always need to specify in addition 
which underlying transport is used with it?

Jukka

On 03/25/2010 05:24 PM, Xiaoming Fu wrote:
> Hi Jukka,
>
> Thanks a lot for your comments.
>
> We will address issues your raised and submit a new version asap, with a
> clarification to your last part comments:
>  > - 9. IANA section: name the MA protocol 4 differently, we could also
>  > have DCCP and DTLS. Thus, MA protocol 4 is DTLS over SCTP."
> nsis/current/msg08493.html
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web
> Earlier the WG has commented on this, and seems to have agreed on
> identifying DTLS as a separate MA (thus the ID changed its name as
> well), which can be used for SCTP and other transport mechanisms in the
> future:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web//nsis/current/msg08483.html
>
> I think this way might make more sense, as it allows a stacked MAs
> (alike TLS vs TCP).
> What do you think?
> Xiaoming
> On 3/25/2010 5:00 PM, Jukka Manner wrote:
>> Hi Xiaoming,
>>
>> I have reviewed the draft and would like to see the following things
>> fixed before we can conclude that the draft is ready to go forward:
>>
>> - Introduction:
>> * what are these "other issues" of TCP? Please clarify.
>> * "...especially if deployment over the public Internet is
>> contemplated": I don't quite get this statement. SCTP, as DCCP, does not
>> natively get through firewalls (nor NATs), so SCTP is not directly
>> applicable to the Internet at large, on the contrary.
>>
>> - S3.4: s/"was able to remain"/"was able to retain"/
>>
>> - 5.1: In practice the multihoming support of SCTP is not that
>> beneficial. Since NSIS is about signaling on the data path, and if that
>> data path fails, it doesn't really the application if the state can
>> still be refreshed using an alternative path. The only benefit of
>> multihoming might be that the state on the failed path can be more
>> quickly torn down using the multihoming capability of SCTP. So, please
>> be more clear on this, the current text goes back and forth on the topic.
>>
>> - 9. IANA section: name the MA protocol 4 differently, we could also
>> have DCCP and DTLS. Thus, MA protocol 4 is DTLS over SCTP.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jukka

-- 
Jukka MJ Manner, Professor, PhD.  Phone:  +358+(0)9+470 22481
Aalto University                  Mobile: +358+(0)50+5112973
Department of Communications      Fax:    +358+(0)9+470 22474
and Networking (Comnet)           Office: G320a (Otakaari 5A)
P.O. Box 13000, FIN-00076 Aalto   E-mail: [email protected]
Finland                           www.netlab.hut.fi/~jmanner/