On 11/3/2015 5:27 PM, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen wrote: > HI, > > As a general comment then I believe that when describing what is supported > by TCP/SCTP (or UDP) as standard then it does not suffice to look into > IETF RFCs. > One need at least to relate to the *basic functions* of the POSIX/Berkeley > socket api standard. > > My understanding of the TCP API, for example, is that while RFC793 did > specify an abstract API for TCP, then > the true defacto standard for the socket api is the Berkeley socket api > from .?. around 1990. > Not saying the different socket api standards don't differ and that there > is *one* standard to look at. > But making is be RFC793 rather then what emerged as defacto in the 1990's > seems a "bit odd" to me.
There are implementations of TCP that do not use the Berkeley sockets model. Note, though, that the concept of a socket for communications itself comes from RFC793, not Unix. > Especially since we have RFCs RFC1122 dating back to 1989 already > clarifying part of RFC793 (namely the PUSH bit) > And one, much more recent, RFC6093, clarifying the urgent bit. When we talk about TCP, we certainly mean more than just RFC793 - we include all updates to that spec, which include these documents. In some cases, the updates came from implementation experience; in other cases, they came from the standards community because of more fundamental concerns. Joe _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
