RFC 5595: The Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP) Service Codes
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document describes the usage of Service Codes by the Datagram Congestion Control Protocol, RFC 4340. It motivates the setting of a Service Code by applications. Service Codes provide a method to identify the intended service/application to process a DCCP connection request. This provides improved flexibility in the use and assignment of port numbers for connection multiplexing. The use of a DCCP Service Code can also enable more explicit coordination of services with middleboxes (e.g., network address translators and firewalls). This document updates the specification provided in RFC 4340. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5595
- Published
- September 2009
- Authors
- G. Fairhurst
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- tsv
- Pages
- 19
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5596Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP) Simultaneous-Open Technique to Facilitate NAT/Middlebox TraversalCurrent
September 2009
- RFC 5597Network Address Translation (NAT) Behavioral Requirements for the Datagram Congestion Control ProtocolCurrent
September 2009
- RFC 5622Profile for Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP) Congestion ID 4: TCP-Friendly Rate Control for Small Packets (TFRC-SP)Updated
August 2009
- RFC 5559Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) ArchitectureCurrent
June 2009
- RFC 5634Quick-Start for the Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP)Current
August 2009
- RFC 5651Layered Coding Transport (LCT) Building BlockCurrent
October 2009
- RFC 5525Reliable Server Pooling MIB Module DefinitionCurrent
April 2009
- RFC 5670Metering and Marking Behaviour of PCN-NodesCurrent
November 2009
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?