search

tsvwg / ietf-multipath-dccp

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-multipath-dccp/
8 stars 13 forks source link

Single Multipath option vs. multiple ones #226

Closed markusa closed 11 months ago

markusa commented 1 year ago

Second comment from Olivier's review in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/T-9P8iVoU5i89VK9QJXnOG_IsL4/

My second concern is the utilization of a single Multipath option. In 
MPTCP, this was required to deal with middleboxes. I'm not sure that 
there are middleboxes that understand DCCP and interfere with it.
markusa commented 1 year ago

Hi Olivier,

This was a design decision by the authors to maintain a clear and consistent structure in the IANA registry for DCCP option types: https://www.iana.org/assignments/dccp-parameters/dccp-parameters.xhtml#dccp-parameters-5

Thus, the options for DCCP and MP-DCCP remain clearly separated, which maintains clarity in the case of extensions to both domains.

This concept has proven itself in the Linux reference implementation. We therefore see no convincing argument that would make it worth reversing this design decision.