|
|
|
|
|
by monstermonster
4269 days ago
|
|
Couple of follow ups on this one: SCTP is message oriented rather than stream oriented so this isn't really useful. The chunk size is also two bytes meaning that all your messages have to be less than 64k or you have to implement packet reassembly and stuff. Oh look, back at TCP again. We must do nothing. I suspect this entire SPDY/HTTP/2 reengineering effort is a 1000% complexity and risk increase for a 2-5% gain in performance. That is not a trade-off as an engineer I could accept. 90% of the inefficiency of web applications is down to the application stack, not the protocols. Sending hundreds of KiB of uncompressed text down rather than compressed abstract or native virtual machine instructions for example is a bigger win. |
|
Oh wait, SCTP can act in an ordered-with-congestion-control mode (aka stream-oriented), and the userland interface to it (the most basic form of which is just plain old Berkeley sockets) does in fact implement packet assembly (of course, no matter what, if you want packets bigger than the MTU something's gonna have to disassemble and reassemble them on some level of the stack anyways).
Not to say that SCTP is a practical solution given the glacial pace of acceptance of any new network protocol at its level, but let's not start spreading FUD about its capabilities.