[e2e] Open the floodgate
michael.welzl at uibk.ac.at
Fri Apr 23 09:54:11 PDT 2004
> > > Still, my question remains: why don't we have these
> > separate checksums
> > > as a TCP option? It strikes me as a rather simple method for links
> > > where erroneous data are actually handed over, and I
> > believe that it's
> > > about time we transferred these things from the world of
> > research into
> > > the IETF.
> > When you have erroneous packets (for whatever reaso other
> > than congestion), who will inform about that? Maybe the
> > addresses themselves are erroneous. Besides, some packets
> > just get completely junked ... Special headers will not solve
> > the problem.
> Another reason may be due to deployability issue, if you add checksum in
> TCP options, you have to modify both sending and receiving TCP stack. Is
> it? That is not easy to deploy in real network.
Not easy, but possible, in an incremental fashion.
This is not a reason to abandon it IMO. It wasn't a reason
to abandon ECN either.
More information about the end2end-interest