On the Need for Transport Protocol Profiles & Investigating New Evolution Tracks
draft-boucadair-transport-protocols-01
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mohamed Boucadair , David Binet , Christian Jacquenet , Luis M. Contreras , Yiu Lee | ||
| Last updated | 2015-09-07 (Latest revision 2015-03-06) | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
The world of Internet transport protocols is changing, after decades of TCP and UDP operation. Several proposals have been submitted for the past years (and counting) to introduce other transport protocols that aim at reducing the web latency of that of TCP or avoiding the burden of the various middle-boxes (NATs, firewalls, for one) encountered along the communication path. Such initiatives, although not new, are motivated by the complexity of some (non-transparent) networking functions. This document advocates for the definition of transport profiles and the need to document recommendations for middleboxes, including Performance Enhancement Proxies (PEPs) behaviors. A collaboration among the involved players (service providers, vendors) is required to soften the current complications encountered in the Internet at large.
Authors
Mohamed Boucadair
David Binet
Christian Jacquenet
Luis M. Contreras
Yiu Lee
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)