Re: [hiprg] HIP experiment report comment on opportunistic mode

Hi,

Am 06.12.2011 um 09:01 schrieb Henderson, Thomas R:

> I would like to respond to one of Stephen Farrell's comment on the HIP experiment report:
> 
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-hip-experiment/ballot/
> 
> The comment is:
> 
> " - I wondered what were the "controversial experiences" on p10. Seems
> a shame to tease the reader like that."
> 
> The relevant section of text is:
> 
>   In the context of the HIPL project, the opportunistic mode has been
>   successfully applied at the HIP layer for service registration
>   [RFC5203].  However, there are controversial experiences on applying
>   opportunistic mode at the application layer for legacy software.
>   HIP4BSD implemented opportunistic mode successfully with small
>   modifications to the FreeBSD socket layer to support opportunistic
>   mode.
> 
> Could someone elaborate on the controversial experience (and perhaps provide a reference)?  Note that elsewhere in the report (section 2.3.2), the disadvantages and "leap of faith" aspects of opportunistic mode are elaborated on, so I'm wondering whether the reference to controversial experiences goes beyond the disadvantages already listed in section 2.3.2 (or whether we could instead strike those words from the draft and refer back to that section).
> 
As far as I can tell, we in Aachen have not used the opportunistic mode extensively. Miika seemed to have used it/struggled with it quite a bit. Maybe he has some comments on this.

BR, Tobias

> - Tom
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hiprg mailing list
> hiprg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hiprg

-- 
Dipl.-Inform. Tobias Heer, Ph.D. Student
Chair of Communication and Distributed Systems - comsys
RWTH Aachen University, Germany
tel: +49 241 80 207 76
web: http://www.comsys.rwth-aachen.de/team/tobias-heer/
blog: http://dtobi.wordpress.com/
card: http://card.ly/dtobi
pgp id: AEECA5BF