From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eddie Kohler <kohler@cs.ucla.edu>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 16:28:11 +0000
Subject: Re: Report: feat negot state
Message-Id: <440F061B.20001@cs.ucla.edu>
List-Id: <dccp.vger.kernel.org>
References: <39e6f6c70603061905i1db54071m6cc2776edd3828bb@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <39e6f6c70603061905i1db54071m6cc2776edd3828bb@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: dccp@vger.kernel.org

Hi Arnaldo,

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>The Init Cookie option lets the server package up all that state, send it to
>>the client, and forget it.  The server might still have to load a CCID, but
>>that doesn't worry me -- we only have 3 CCIDs.
> 
> 
> Sure, Init Cookie will be eventually implemented, but I want to
> support everything
> that is specified in the draft, and furthermore, reworking the core Linux INET
> infrastructure to have TCP and DCCP sharing _everything_ that is not specific to
> one of them, that has been my goal since day one, if I decided just to implement
> Init Cookies I would have a much easier ride, but I'm stubborn on supporting all
> the things specified in the draft to the best of my capacity use this
> implementation
> to fully validate the draft in the Real World(tm), even if takes more time 8)
> 
> If one looks at work Eric Dumazet, Ben LaHaise and others are doing on improving
> TCP that _already_ are helping DCCP due to all this code sharing, its
> wonderful, I
> really, really didn't wanted to go the SCTP way where few things is shared with
> other INET connection oriented protocols (well, at the time there was
> only TCP :P).

This is a great approach!  But TCP implements syn cookies, which is very 
similar to the Init Cookie.  So Init Cookies are not totally DCCP-only.  I'm 
just saying the DOS need not be such a big deal.

Eddie