Re: [Dime] [RFC3588bis-34] - Host-IP-Address AVP

Ben,

On Sep 18, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:

> 
> On Sep 18, 2012, at 7:06 AM, jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Sep 18, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Glen Zorn wrote:
>>> 
> 
>>> This doesn't really make sense to me: I was under the impression that a TCP connection was between two unique addresses.  Yes, a box might ___have_ a whole bunch of addresses it _could_ use, but that seems irrelevant in the case of TCP (but not SCTP).
>> 
>> Sure TCP is between just two IPs. I never claimed otherwise. What I mean
>> that say a Diameter node has IP1 to IP5. Only IP1 has a A/AAAA record or
>> given out to other parties for static configuration. During the CER/CEA
>> (and the TCP connection established to IP1) it tell in CEA that
>> "I btw also have IP2 to IP5". A clever implementation can make use of
>> this e.g. for the transport failure case I described.
>> 
> 
> This actually leads me to agree with the original poster that the behavior surrounding Host-IP-Address is underspecified. The problem is, "clever implementations" are bad for interoperability. If that (or other) behavior is desired, it should be documented. Otherwise any behavior beyond "use it for informational purposes only" is not likely to work across implementations.

First, we all agree that having more than one Host-IP-Address in case of
TCP is unnecessary. However, I am interested what possible (error) case
you have in mind that could cause interoperability issue?

- Jouni

> 
> I'm do not propose we fix this in 3588bis--it's too late in the process for that. But it might be worth a follow-on effort down the road.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Ben.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> - Jouni
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> DiME mailing list
>> DiME@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> 