Better networking with SCTP

SCTP does two things that I think are hugely important.<p>First, it provides a datagram/record transport that is TCP-friendly. The most important thing TCP does isn't reliability; it's the insanely complicated interpretive dance it performs with other TCPs to keep them from melting the network. Right now, your only scalable transport option is TCP, which means you're boned if you want real-time.<p>Second, it provides reliable out-of-order delivery, which is exactly the happy medium that I assert without evidence 99% of UDP apps actually need. Reliability good. Enforced ordered delivery bad; means updates lag behind stale data.<p>The big issue with SCTP is that firewalls will block it.

Not questioning the OP's intentions, but a remote vulnerability in most SCTP stacks was published last week: <a href="http://pastebin.com/m6863ef05" rel="nofollow">http://pastebin.com/m6863ef05</a> CVE-2009-0065

"Since then, it has found its way into all major operating systems, including GNU/Linux, BSD, and Solaris. It's also available for the Microsoft® Windows® operating systems as a third-party commercial package."<p>I don't think that you can really exclude Windows from the category "major operating systems". It might not be your favorite operating system (it certainly isn't mine), but give the devil his due.

What would be really cool would be a sctp option for vnc. When you're working on a poor connection, it's really annoying when vnc becomes blocked waiting for some rectangle to be retransmitted, when it could perfectly well keep going updating the other rectangles.

Would it be ideal for HTTP to be delivered over SCTP instead of TCP? If so, how the heck can the internet migrate over to SCTP?