Using SCTP as a Transport Layer Protocol for HTTP
draft-natarajan-httpbis-sctp-00
| Document | Type |
Replaced Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Preethi Natarajan , Professor Paul D. Amer , Jonathan Leighton , Fred Baker | ||
| Last updated | 2008-11-18 (Latest revision 2008-10-27) | ||
| Replaced by | draft-natarajan-http-over-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 | Replaced by draft-natarajan-http-over-sctp | |
| 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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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) [RFC2116] 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 other innovative services unavailable in TCP. The objectives of this draft are three-fold: (i) to highlight SCTP services that better match HTTP's needs than TCP, (ii) to propose a design for persistent and pipelined HTTP 1.1 transactions over SCTP's multistreaming service, and (iii) to share some lessons learned from implementing HTTP over SCTP. Finally, open issues warranting more discussion and/or investigation are listed.
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.)