Re: [dccp] dccp draft | additional note to section 5.8.

[Mark Handley <M.Handley at cs.ucl.ac.uk>]

On 2/8/06, Eddie Kohler <kohler at cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> But we don't say what happens if someone DOES include more than one feature
> negotiation option referring to the same feature; and we don't say, in cases
> like NDP Count, anything about option duplication.
>
> I think there is an issue here, Mark; wouldn't TCP be better if you didn't
> need to normalize it?

I think we're agreeing.  It should probably say on a per-option basis.

There is always this tradeoff of specifying everything (good for
security) vs specifying just enough (good for evolution).

The TCP spec had said that certain bits must be zero, and ignored on
receipt.  Then firewall vendors decided to drop certain packets if
those bits weren't zero.  Result was ECN stalled on deployment.  So
perhaps it doesn't matter anyway - if firewalls impose de-facto
limits, then it doesn't matter if the protocol has inherent
possibilities for extension - you may not be able to use those
possibilities in reality.

 - Mark