RINA - scott whaps at the nanog hornets nest :-)

Sun Nov 7 01:14:48 UTC 2010

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 11:45:01 -0500
Jack Bates <jbates at brightok.net> wrote:

> On 11/5/2010 5:32 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
> >
> > It's really quiet in here.  So, for some Friday fun let me whap at the hornets nest and see what happens...>;-)
> >
> >
> > http://www.ionary.com/PSOC-MovingBeyondTCP.pdf
> >
> 
> SCTP is a great protocol. It has already been implemented in a number of 
> stacks. With these benefits over that theory, it still hasn't become 
> mainstream yet. People are against change. They don't want to leave v4. 
> They don't want to leave tcp/udp. Technology advances, but people will 
> only change when they have to.
> 

Lock of SCTP availability is nothing to do with people's avoidance of
change - it's likely that deployed Linux kernels in the last 3 to 5
years already have it complied in. IPv4 NAT is what has prevented it
from being deployed, because NATs don't understand it and therefore
can't NAT addresses carried within it.

This is one of the reasons why NAT is bad for the Internet - it has
prevented deployment and/or utilisation of new transport protocols, such
as SCTP or DCCP, that provide benefits over UDP or TCP.

> 
> Jack (lost brain cells actually reading that pdf)
> 

Glad I haven't then, just the quotes from it hurt.

Regards,
Mark.