QUESTION: About the RFCs of DCCP
Hello,
I am plan to make an Conformance Test Suite for DCCP which is under packet level. It's aim to test the packet format, options, feature, sequence numbers, event processing etc. base on the rfc4340. Maybe also rfc4341, rfc4342.
It is there some fix RFCs or fix draft for the rfc4340? Or base on rfc4340 is enough?
Wei Yongjun
Quoted 11 lines · Wei Yongjun
Hello,
I am plan to make an Conformance Test Suite for DCCP which is under packet level. It's aim to test the packet format, options, feature, sequence numbers, event processing etc. base on the rfc4340. Maybe also rfc4341, rfc4342.
It is there some fix RFCs or fix draft for the rfc4340? Or base on rfc4340 is enough?Wei Yongjun
The better place to ask this is on the IETF mailing list. See here for more details:
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/dccp-charter.html
Signature · 2 lines
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/ Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz
| I am plan to make an Conformance Test Suite for DCCP which is under | packet level. It's aim to test the packet format, options, feature, | sequence numbers, event processing etc. base on the rfc4340. Maybe also | rfc4341, rfc4342. |
Maybe this is of help, Andrea Bittau did something similar earlier, at
http://tapir.cs.ucl.ac.uk/pccd/
Just out of curiosity - are you using an existing system such as PCS
(http://pcs.sourceforge.net/) or KAME/TAHI?
Quoted 8 lines · Gerrit Renker
| I am plan to make an Conformance Test Suite for DCCP which is under | packet level. It's aim to test the packet format, options, feature, | sequence numbers, event processing etc. base on the rfc4340. Maybe also | rfc4341, rfc4342. |Maybe this is of help, Andrea Bittau did something similar earlier, at
http://tapir.cs.ucl.ac.uk/pccd/
I have saw this, but it is has so little test case. And looks like it has no test log detail.
Quoted 4 lines
Just out of curiosity - are you using an existing system such as PCS
(http://pcs.sourceforge.net/) or KAME/TAHI?
I am used TAHI's v6eval, and added DCCP support. So The test log looks very good.^_^
Now it is under development. After it completed, I'll publish the test tools and test result.
Quoted 6 lines
I am used TAHI's v6eval, and added DCCP support. So The test log looks very good.^_^
Now it is under development. After it completed, I'll publish the test tools and test result.
That sounds great and would be a very useful tool to have. Can you please drop us a line if something is available?
- Gerrit
Quoted 10 lines · Gerrit Renker
Quoted 7 lines
I am used TAHI's v6eval, and added DCCP support. So The test log looks very good.^_^
Now it is under development. After it completed, I'll publish the test tools and test result.
That sounds great and would be a very useful tool to have. Can you please drop us a line if something is available?
It's a pleasure to this.
At this time, the TAHI support is completed for rfc 4340, and I am making the test frame for DCCP test, and it has little test case in it although the test frame is under test.
It also found something does not completed implement rfc, such as the two patch I had send to the mail list, and the BUG [Re: Reporting possible bug in DCCP Feature negotiation] which is reported by Leandro Sales can be reproduct simplely.
Quoted 5 lines
It also found something does not completed implement rfc, such as the two patch I had send to the mail list, and the BUG [Re: Reporting possible bug in DCCP Feature negotiation] which is reported by Leandro Sales can be reproduct simplely.
Then it would be even more valuable to have such a tool. The bug you referred to was hard to track down manually since it only occurred when the Ack carrying the Confirm options was lost. I could only reproduce it by modifying the kernel to drop the single Ack of the client completing the 3-way handshake. With a tool, this would have been much easier.
Please do report any faults, omissions or incompleteness that you find while testing.
- Gerrit