Re: [mif] MIF at the application level

marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es> Sun, 15 March 2009 21:22 UTC

Return-Path: <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>
X-Original-To: mif@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 539153A6B99 for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.44
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.159, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bdOijB87OmlV for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:22:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es (smtp02.uc3m.es [163.117.176.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4543A6936 for <mif@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from marcelo-bagnulos-macbook-pro.local (239.pool85-53-150.dynamic.orange.es [85.53.150.239]) by smtp02.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3D2656C48; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 22:23:26 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <49BD71CE.6010100@it.uc3m.es>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 22:23:26 +0100
From: marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>
References: <49BD655F.8080808@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <49BD655F.8080808@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-5.6.0.1016-16522.002
Cc: mif@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mif] MIF at the application level
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 21:22:50 -0000

but NICE is about how selecting address pairs, rather than just the 
local address, isn't it?

I mean, i would expect that selecting the local address to be a much 
simpler problem than selecting the address pair

regards, marcelo

Marc Petit-Huguenin escribió:
> I read the 4 documents listed in the agenda for the MIF BOF, and I
> am surprised to see very few discussion about the application
> behavior in presence of multiple interfaces.  The documents talk
> mostly about operating system configuration but, in the spirit of
> the end to end argument, I do think that the final decision on what
> network to choose (when there is a choice) should be made by the
> application, with fallback to some automatic configuration when the
> application is not smart enough to do this.  NICE
> (draft-rosenberg-mmusic-ice-nonsip) is a very good example on how an
> application can choose between different networks and perhaps this
> draft, that does not seem to be maintained currently, could be part
> of the deliverables of the future MIF WG.
>
>