Re: Renumbering ... Should we consider an association that spans transports?

[Tony Finch <dot at dotat.at>]

On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Keith Moore wrote:

> Offhand I don't know why it should be necessary to build a mechanism
> that spans several transport lifetimes.

TLS session caches. HTTP cookies. FTP control connections.

Apps that want to deal with concurrent data streams within one user's
session currently have to establish and authenticate multiple TCP
connections (e.g. HTTP, IMAP) or re-implement TCP's multiplexing and
windowing at the application level (e.g. BEEP, ssh).

A session layer would allow an app to establish a security context once
then re-use it when establishing new transport connections, so that
re-connecting can be cheap and concurrent data streams can be simple.
Unfortunately TCP doesn't share congestion information between
connections, which penalises new bulk-data streams and requires
workarounds at the application level (e.g. HTTP/1.1 persistent
connections).

(I have been thinking along similar lines to Karl.)

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <dot at dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
IRISH SEA: SOUTHERLY, BACKING NORTHEASTERLY FOR A TIME, 3 OR 4. SLIGHT OR
MODERATE. SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD, OCCASIONALLY POOR.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf