Subject: Re: sctp_peeloff()

From: Kacheong Poon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:42:04 -0800

Michael Tuexen wrote:

> But my main point is: for supporting different receive buffers
> for different streams you also need different flow controls for
> different streams. Do you agree with this statement?

It really depends.  I think what Caitlin's point is that an app
does not have control over on putting data from one particular
stream to one particular pool of buffers.  For example, in the current
socket API, an app gives a buffer the recvmsg().  It does not know
which stream's data will be put into that buffer.  With stream-socket,
the app can control this as the buffer given to recvmsg() will
only be filled with data from a particular stream.  This has nothing
to do with flow control.  The flow control issue comes up at the
protocol level.

> Then there is the next problem: Can we extend SCTP (or even do we
> need to extend) to provide a per stream flow control. Some guys
> thought about this already and the result was, that it is not
> possible to do as an extension. Of course, SCTP could have been
> designed to provide that feature. But it was not done that way.

Again, the API is not about changing SCTP.  This needs to be
emphasized.

-- 

						K. Poon.
						[email-masked]