[ih] Separation of TCP and IP

[Grant Taylor]

On 6/23/22 10:52 PM, Toerless Eckert via Internet-history wrote:
> Well, the contributors who wanted fast and wide spread of their 
> transport work certainly choose the "over UDP" route instead of other 
> routes. The next best thing i remember is LD_PRELOAD solutions, but 
> those overloaded TCP sockets without actually doing TCP stacks. So 
> i am not aware of recent RAW socket TCP stacks. Happy to learn what 
> you remember/know!

I think that I've read public accounts of CloudFlare and / or Netflix 
doing user space TCP/IP stacks.

Sorry, I'm not at liberty to discuss what my $EMPLOYER does.

> We have multiple decades of managing network traffic based on 5-tuple 
> with well-known port numbres. This has eroded in the past decade for 
> Internet traffic due to end-to-end encryption and will erode even 
> more due to QUIC.

I've long been a fan of discrete ports for things and not shoving 
everything over -- what I'll call -- bearer protocols; e.g. HTTP(S) / QUIC.

Maybe it's my preference for the esoteric, but I'm actually quite happy 
with IPsec transport mode mesh between my servers.

> There where a few drafts pointing out the issues that are yet to come 
> with QUIC proliferation.  If we would not have had this history, but 
> one where like we will get it with QUIC now there are only meaningless 
> UDP port numbers and no other visibility, then i wouldn't even dare 
> to predict how a lot of the stuff we did with those 5 tuples would 
> have evolved over the decades.

I think we're about to enter a time when the only way to viably do 
anything is to actively monkey in the middle traffic so that we have 
application layer visibility into the data streams.

> Granted, we could probably had it half way, so i was justing about 
> the extreme case.

ACK



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die