Using SCTP as a Transport Layer Protocol for HTTP
draft-natarajan-http-over-sctp-02
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Preethi Natarajan , Professor Paul D. Amer , Jonathan Leighton , Fred Baker | ||
Last updated | 2009-07-09 | ||
Replaces | draft-natarajan-httpbis-sctp | ||
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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
Hyper-Text Transfer Protocol (HTTP) [RFC2616] requires a reliable transport for end-to-end communication. While historically TCP has been used for this purpose, this document proposes an alternative -- the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) [RFC4960]. Similar to TCP, SCTP offers a reliable end-to-end transport connection to applications. Additionally, SCTP offers innovative services unavailable in TCP. This draft (i) specifies HTTP over SCTP's multistreaming service, (ii) lists open issues warranting more discussion and/or investigation, and (iii) shares some lessons learned from implementing HTTP over SCTP. Finally, this document highlights SCTP services that better match HTTP's needs than TCP.
Authors
Preethi Natarajan
Professor Paul D. Amer
Jonathan Leighton
Fred Baker
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)