I've ready a thread in russian Nginx maillist about implementing HTTP/SPDY over SCTP in future.
I realize that SCTP is completely unusable for public service at the moment, but what changes should happen for SCTP to replace TCP for public web?
Asked
Active
Viewed 1,679 times
1
-
Time travel is one really hard problem to solve when implementing protocols in the future :P – gparent May 18 '12 at 19:35
-
ipv6 questions was pure theory just couple of years ago. That's why it's such a big problem now. – DukeLion May 18 '12 at 19:38
1 Answers
3
Why SCTP, I wonder? SPDY specifically implements the multiplexing itself within TCP because SCTP isn't practical in the short term.
In my understanding, the biggest barrier to SCTP deployment today is support for the protocol in the operating systems of endpoints, and support for the protocol in transit in NAT and firewall network devices (anything that needs to actually be able to inspect the protocol).
Most decent firewalls will let you allow an IP protocol number, but support for more granular port rules and connection tracking for NAT is a must for widespread deployment. NAT support in consumer routers is going to be a real barrier - those devices don't tend to be very close to the "cutting edge" of decade-old internet standards (say, for instance, IPv6).
Shane Madden
- 114,520
- 13
- 181
- 251
-
IPv6 supposed to make NAT useless. I think that IPv6 support in SOHO/consumer routers is more close than SCTP NAT fixup – DukeLion May 18 '12 at 19:55
-
Yeah, but when NAT's gone in IPv6, then those consumer routers still need to be able to inspect the protocol and act as a firewall. It doesn't seem terribly likely that the consumer routers with IPv6 support deployed over the next 5 years will tend to have SCTP support. – Shane Madden May 18 '12 at 19:58