Re: [Hipsec] multipath transmission

Hi,

nice work! I believe it justifies a document of its own. My suggestion 
would be a new research group document because the work is still based 
on simulations, lacks interoperability results and experimentation in 
the wild. I'd also like to see the existing mobility and multihoming 
draft to make rapid progress rather than being blocked by new extensions.

On 11/08/2010 05:40 PM, Andrei Gurtov wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> We've been discussing with Tom on integrating text on multipath
> scheduler in HIP to the new multihoming draft. Do you think that's a
> good idea? The section would be more like advanced/optional feature in
> the document which is not mandatory to implement. The actual idea is
> described in following papers
>
> A. Gurtov, T. Polishchuk, Secure Multipath Transport for Legacy Internet
> Applications, in Proc. of BROADNETS'09, September 2009.
> T. Polishchuk, A. Gurtov, Improving TCP-friendliness for mHIP , to
> appear in Proc. of 5th International Conference on Access Networks
> (ACCESSNETS'10), November 2010.
> http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/gurtov/papers/
>
> BR
> Andrei
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkzYGdkACgkQP7jp0uceFkR+EQCaAjpyN5Fwx8CtCyQt87sQYh3c
> K6QAoIiExYIEEzXY/O6Zz15FyYS3aGeR
> =RcFd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Hipsec mailing list
> Hipsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec