> -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Smith > [mailto:na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org] > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 9:41 PM > To: George Bonser > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: IPv6 fc00::/7 — Unique local addresses > > I agree. One application I'd though of was end-to-end Instant > Messaging, where, when you wish to transfer a file to the other > participant, a new SCTP stream is created for the file transfer within > the existing SCTP connection. Not all that novel, but something that > would be much easier to do with SCTP than TCP.
The absolute win is the elimination of "head of line" blocking. So if you have a large transfer going, that little short IM or even email notification or whatever gets sent immediately by being multiplexed into the data stream instead of being dumped in at the end of a buffer full of other stuff. By having streams for different sorts of content, it has the potential to conserve considerable resources. Rather than having a separate connection for each type of content, you have only one. Now if they would figure out a good way to load balance SCTP, we would be all set. But the real win is where you have a mix of bulk data streams and interactive small data transfers. The bulk transfer doesn't interfere with the interactive experience. And there are so many other potential applications like maybe persistent VOIP "trunks" between branch offices over a long-lived SCTP connection with each of those "trunks" being a stream within one connection. The applications are potentially killer but nobody has really tapped into that area yet. Heck, multicast hasn't really lived up to its potential, either.
