[e2e] How TCP might look with always there ESP

Robert Moskowitz rgm-ietf at htt-consult.com
Wed Jul 18 05:38:19 PDT 2001

At 10:32 AM 7/17/2001 -0700, Douglas Otis wrote:

>If you wish this scheme to be useful for SCTP on a packet basis as well as
>TCP, you may wish to consider using the sequence number only to be
>restrictive within a sliding window and not use it to mandate sequential
>delivery.  This suggestion changes existing schemes for TLS but would allow
>normal layering of security.  As security digests are larger than current
>checksums or CRC fields, it would not be difficult to conclude improved
>error detection as a result.

I am not conversant on SCTP, sigh.  ESP does not call out for sequential 
delivery, even with IPsec compression.  A sliding window of 32 packets is a 
MUST implement and 64 is RECOMMENDED.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list