Re: SCTP in KAME / Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it withsomething simpler

From: Peter Lei (peter.lei_at_ieee.org)
Date: 10/23/04

  • Next message: Randall Stewart: "Re: SCTP in KAME / Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it withsomething simpler" 
    Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:58:32 -0500
To: SUZUKI Shinsuke <suz@kame.net>

    I think this is because any bugs that are found are usually
    communicated directly to us.

    I think Randy has a better handle on how many people are using
    this stack. I'm quite sure it is stable enough to go in to
    -current.

    While the SCTP API hasn't gone through last call, it's fairly
    stable and we have both "converted" many applications from TCP
    to SCTP using the sockets API, as well as had portability between
    the KAME SCTP stack and the linux stack for some test applications
    used at the last interop event (except for the standard sockets
    issues that one runs into even for TCP like no sin_length field
    in the sockaddr struct).

    The same stack has also been ported to Mac OSX as a native kernel
    build as well as an loadable/unloadble NKE w/a minor kernel change.

    I'm not aware of any KAME SNAP compilation failures w/and w/o SCTP.
    The major changes to our SCTP code when it gets committed into KAME
    has been that of code format/style.

    What is the existing criteria for a measure of "stability"?

    regards,
    --peter

    SUZUKI Shinsuke wrote:
    >>>>>>On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:32:48 +0200
    >>>>>>molter@tin.it(Marco Molteni) said:
    >
    >
    >>SCTP in KAME is complete, stable and fully supported.
    >>It is mainly developed by the SCTP RFC author, Randall Stewart.
    >
    >
    > KAME Project haven't received SCTP-related bug report so much, and I
    > think it's due to a lack of testers, SCTP-API standard, and SCTP-ready
    > applications.
    > #Sometimes KAME SNAP compilation fails in SCTP and non-SCTP
    > #application fails in compilation due to a change by SCTP. So it's
    > #difficult to conclude that SCTP is already stable...
    >
    > So I'm not still sure if SCTP in KAME is complete and stable enough to
    > merge into -current. (If someone can contribute to this kind of
    > evaluation, it's quite appreciated, of course!)
    >
    > Thanks,
    > ----
    > SUZUKI, Shinsuke @ KAME Project
    > _______________________________________________
    > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
    > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
    > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    >

  • Next message: Randall Stewart: "Re: SCTP in KAME / Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it withsomething simpler"

    Relevant Pages