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

Re: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?

To: Thierry Turletti <Thierry.Turletti@sophia.inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
From: Eddie Kohler <kohler@icir.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:34:44 -0700
cc: dcp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Message from Thierry Turletti <Thierry.Turletti@sophia.inria.fr> of "Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:38:16 +0200." <200204291038.g3TAcGd05948@pif.inria.fr>
List-Id: Datagram Control Protocol <dcp.ietf.org>
Reply-To: dcp@ietf.org
Sender: dcp-admin@ietf.org

Hi Thierry,

Our take is that we designed DCCP for unicast, and the vast majority of its
features (acks, feature negotiation, ...) would not be meaningful in a
multicast context. Any DCCP-like protocol for multicast would be so
different that you might as well give it its own name. Of course such a
protocol could use ideas from DCCP, as far as they are applicable.

Eddie

_______________________________________________
dcp mailing list
dcp@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcp

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
  - From: Allison Mankin <mankin@isi.edu>

References:
- [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
  - From: Thierry Turletti <Thierry.Turletti@sophia.inria.fr>

Prev by Date: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
Next by Date: Re: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
Previous by thread: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
Next by thread: Re: [dcp] is ...ticast taboo ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread