Re: why IPv6 is bad, No, SMTP is IPv4, Was: SMTP and IPv6

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 7/4/24 18:45, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

TCP? I said transport.

TCP has a rather 1980s view of transport which we have moved beyond with QUIC. TCP does not comprehend the type of network level flexibility that I am talking about.
Ok, well as long as applications are using TCP then stability of endpoint address bindings matters.

As far as the application layer is concerned, all that actually matters is the ability to establish a connection to a named endpoint and exchange one or more streams of data. Why should the application need to be aware of what is going on at the network layer? The function of the transport layer is to gloss over all that.

In my experience, people like to make blanket assertions about what applications need.  Usually they're rather naive about it, because they're only thinking of things like HTTP and not the broad spectrum of apps.  Or, they don't think that any other kinds of apps need to exist.   I try to ignore, or circumvent, those people.

Keith



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux