Re: Checksum at IP layer - is it even needed ?

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

 



> If the content is not understood by anyone except the intended endpoint 
> the occasional misdelivery is surely of no consequence.

There's still a risk of port pollution (IPv4) or destination pollution (IPv6)
from misdeliveries without checksums.

not understood != not handled and pushed up the stack. 

 
Lloyd Wood lloyd.wood@xxxxxxxxxxx http://about.me/lloydwood 


From: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@xxxxxxxxx>; Alexey Eromenko <al4321@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ietf <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; Jared Mauch <jared@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, 15 December 2015, 10:04
Subject: Re: Checksum at IP layer - is it even needed ?

On 14/12/2015 21:55, Christopher Morrow wrote:



> I suppose: "Why are we trying to solve this in tcp/udp? why not solve
> this at the application layer with TLS?" .

Yes, I was wondering about this.

If the content is not understood by anyone except the intended endpoint
the occasional misdelivery is surely of no consequence.

Stewart





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