Hi EveryOne.
why TCP and UDP are widely used.however we have sctp that is more reliable then both TCP and UDP protocol ?
Kindly answer the question?
Hadeel Saleh Haj Aliwi
Dear Nisar,
SCTP is not very much known and not used/deployed a lot because:
- Widespread: Not widely integrated in TCP/IP stacks (in 2013: still missing natively in latest Mac OSX and Windows)
- Libraries: Few high level bindings in easy to use languages
- NAT: Doesn't cross NAT very well/at all (less than 1% internet home & enterprise routers do NAT on SCTP).
- Popularity: No general public app use it
- Programming paradigm: it changed a bit: it's still a socket, but you can connect many hosts to many hosts (multihoming), datagram is ordered and reliable.
- Complexity: SCTP stack is complex to implement
- Competition: Multipath TCP is coming and should address multihoming needs / capabilities so people refrain from implementing SCTP if possible, waiting for MTCP
- Niche: Needs SCTP fills are very peculiar (ordered reliable datagrams, multistream) and not needed by much applications
- Security: SCTP evades security controls (some firewalls, most IDSes, all DLPs, does not appear on netstat except CentOS/Redhat/Fedora...)
- Audit-ability: Something like 3 companies in the world routinely do audits of SCTP security
- Learning curve: Not much toolchain to play with SCTP
- Under the hood: Used mostly in telecom and everytime you send SMS, start surfing the net on your mobile or make phone calls, you're often triggering messages that flow over SCTP (SIGTRAN/SS7 with GSM/UMTS, Diameter with LTE/IMS/RCS, S1AP/X2AP with LTE), so you actually use it a lot but you never know about it
1 votes
1 thanks
Nisar Ahmed Memon
i do appreciate your detail and informative answer.
Thank you very much
0 votes
0 thanks
Ehab Rushdy
SCTP is not very much known and not used/deployed a lot because:
- Widespread: Not widely integrated in TCP/IP stacks (in 2013: still missing natively in latest Mac OSX and Windows)
- Libraries: Few high level bindings in easy to use languages (Disclaimer: i'm maintainer of pysctp, SCTP easy stack support for Python)
- NAT: Doesn't cross NAT very well/at all (less than 1% internet home & enterprise routers do NAT on SCTP).
- Popularity: No general public app use it
- Programming paradigm: it changed a bit: it's still a socket, but you can connect many hosts to many hosts (multihoming), datagram is ordered and reliable, erc...
- Complexity: SCTP stack is complex to implement (due to above)
- Competition: Multipath TCP is coming and should address multihoming needs / capabilities so people refrain from implementing SCTP if possible, waiting for MTCP
- Niche: Needs SCTP fills are very peculiar (ordered reliable datagrams, multistream) and not needed by much applications
- Security: SCTP evades security controls (some firewalls, most IDSes, all DLPs, does not appear on netstat except CentOS/Redhat/Fedora...)
- Audit-ability: Something like 3 companies in the world routinely do audits of SCTP security (Disclaimer: I work in one of them)
- Learning curve: Not much toolchain to play with SCTP (check the excellent withsctp that combines nicely with netcat or use socat )
- Under the hood: Used mostly in telecom and everytime you send SMS, start surfing the net on your mobile or make phone calls, you're often triggering messages that flow over SCTP (SIGTRAN/SS7 with GSM/UMTS, Diameter with LTE/IMS/RCS, S1AP/X2AP with LTE), so you actually use it a lot but you never know about it ;-)
0 votes
0 thanks
Nisar Ahmed Memon
Below research paper also answer my question.
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1311/1311.2630.pdf
Thanks to me :)
0 votes
0 thanks
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Statistics
- Probability
- Probability Theory
- Reliability
More Nisar Ahmed Memon's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions