From: grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se   
      
   On Thu, 2010-09-09, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:   
   > In comp.dcom.lans.ethernet Jorgen Grahn  wrote:   
   > (snip)   
   >   
   >> UDP-based protocols keep state too, and are just as picky about where   
   >> the datagram came from as TCP. You cannot expect every datagram to   
   >> contain full context, so the application protocol uses the source   
   >> address:port (and maybe destination too) as a key to lookup state for   
   >> the "conversation".   
   >   
   > Some UDP protocols are picky, but most aren't.  TCP identifies   
   > a connection by the quad   
   > source-address:source-port:destination-address:destination-port.   
   >   
   > Many UDP protcols/implementations will accept anything coming   
   > into the appropriate port.   
      
   I can imagine that applying to DNS and maybe old-fashioned NFS, but do   
   any /relevant/ protocols do that?  Let's say those that aren't (cannot   
   be) stateless?   
      
   I suppose a protocol could include a session identifier in every   
   message, but why do that when the source address (before Skybuck's   
   change) provides exactly that, for free?  It also seems like an open   
   invitation to DoS attacks.   
      
   /Jorgen   
      
   --   
     // Jorgen Grahn    O  o   .   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)