RFC 2556 (rfc2556) - Page 1 of 4
OSI connectionless transport services on top of UDP Applicability Statement for Historic Status
Alternative Format: Original Text Document
Network Working Group S. Bradner
Request for Comments: 2556 Harvard University
Category: Informational March 1999
OSI connectionless transport services on top
of UDP Applicability Statement for Historic Status
Status of this Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
RFC 1240, "OSI connectionless transport services on top of UDP", was
published as a Proposed Standard in June 1991 but at this time there
do not seem to be any implementations which follow RFC 1240. In
addition there is a growing concern over using UDP-based transport
protocols in environments where congestion is a possibility.
1. Use of RFC 1240 Technology
A message was sent to the IETF list in October 1998 seeking any
information on the actual use of the technology described in RFC
1240. A number of responses were received, including from the
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the keeper of
the OSI protocols. None of these messages pointed to any current use
for this technology. Most of the messages which made any
recommendation did recommend that RFC 1240 be moved to historic.
2. Responsiveness to Congestion
Since 1991 there has been a great deal of experience with the
complexities of dealing with congestion in the Internet. Congestion
control algorithms have been improved but there is still work
underway to further understand the issues. In this environment any
UDP-based protocol is somewhat worrisome since quite frequently
people who use UDP-based protocols invent their own reliability and
congestion control functions which may not include the results of the
current state of the art. This leads to a dange r of congestion
collapse with potentially quite serious consequences for the network
in which it is run. See RFC 896 for a discussion of congestion
Bradner Informational