Phelan, Tom wrote:
Hi Gorry, You've raised a couple of issues below that I think we could better keep track of if we have a new thread, so I've renamed the subject here. What I'd like to discuss here is the thought that we can have a generic approach to UDP encapsulation of transport protocols. Since we have no concrete approach on the table, it's a little difficult to comment, but here are my thoughts on what I've heard bandied about.
One thing that I would like people to keep in mind is that DCCP is likely to be deployed on lower processing power embedded systems than SCTP or even TCP. Both of these have fairly heavy memory (both code and data) requirements for real usages where DCCP can be quite a bit smaller.
In addition, checksum computation can be expensive on such machines. Flagging that a checksum may not be valid is fine, but requiring that it always be checked is not.
-a
