Hi Lars, Yes, it sounds like Michael and I are taking very similar approaches. I think we can work together to keep the DCCP draft and Michael's upcoming SCTP draft reasonably compatible. Michael, are you up for that? Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: dccp-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:dccp-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Lars Eggert > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 4:03 AM > To: Michael Tüxen > Cc: gorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; DCCP working group; Phelan, Tom > Subject: Re: One ring to rule them all (generic UDP encap > oftransports) > > Hi, > > On 2009-11-21, at 0:34, Michael Tüxen wrote: > > On Nov 20, 2009, at 9:21 PM, Phelan, Tom wrote: > >> Thanks for the info on SCTP. That makes it sound like SCTP and DCCP > encaps could be high-level-approach compatible. Is there a draft you're > working from for SCTP encap? The last one I saw was substantially > different from what you describe. > > > > the last was is outdated. It was written before I implemented the stuff > in > > the SCTP implementation of FreeBSD and Mac OS X. > > I'm planning to update it for the next IETF. > > I think it'd be desirable if the proposed UDP encapsulations for DCCP and > SCTP were as similar as possible. > > Lars
