Re: [mif] Happy Eyeballs Extension for MIF

<teemu.savolainen@nokia.com> Sun, 27 March 2011 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <teemu.savolainen@nokia.com>
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 73C693A6864 for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.686
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.686 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.087, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 U-IxB1MRlSb0 for <mif@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgw-sa02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.48]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736563A6823 for <mif@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh101.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.22]) by mgw-sa02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p2REhIl1030179; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 17:43:18 +0300
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 27 Mar 2011 17:43:13 +0300
Received: from 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.56) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.255.0; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:43:12 +0200
Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-036.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.6.195]) by 008-AM1MMR1-001.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.56]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.002; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:43:12 +0200
From: teemu.savolainen@nokia.com
To: phdgang@gmail.com, mif@ietf.org
Thread-Topic: [mif] Happy Eyeballs Extension for MIF
Thread-Index: AQHL3l/iJmEbWFclwkO4Kq5pz2pNtJRBV29Q
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 14:43:12 +0000
Message-ID: <916CE6CF87173740BC8A2CE443096962014D2E@008-AM1MPN1-036.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <AANLkTim+jfEdXfkbrYxYYm5jeeT_fsMvpeV+fZYDN0rY@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim+jfEdXfkbrYxYYm5jeeT_fsMvpeV+fZYDN0rY@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.162.79.60]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Mar 2011 14:43:13.0654 (UTC) FILETIME=[4CFF6160:01CBEC8D]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Subject: Re: [mif] Happy Eyeballs Extension for MIF
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, 27 Mar 2011 14:41:45 -0000

Hi,

This is interesting work. Couple of questions:

Is the value of I initially zero for any destination/hostname that has not yet been connected to?

draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option and RFC4191 allow definition of specific routes. In the presence of specific routes it sounds, for me at least, somewhat odd to send connection attempts via all interfaces. What about incrementing I for a destination address that matches a more specific route? Hence initial connection attempt would be sent over the interface that has matching route and other interfaces would be tried only if no reply on the preferred one?

How does the value of I relate to time? (i.e. if I is -1 does the node wait 10ms before trying corresponding less-preferred interface).

Why would the DNS query be sent over all interfaces? Is it because "I" for a destination name is initially a zero? Like in routing case, if Improved DNS Server Selection is in play, would the "I" be nonzero for those interfaces over which DNS suffix matching the requested name has been received on?

Best regards,

	Teemu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mif-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mif-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> ext GangChen
> Sent: 09. maaliskuuta 2011 14:43
> To: mif
> Subject: [mif] Happy Eyeballs Extension for MIF
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available.
> 
>        Title           : Happy Eyeballs Extension for Multiple
> Interfaces
>        Author(s)       : G. Chen
>        Filename        : draft-chen-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-00.txt
>        Pages           : 6
>        Date            : 2011-03-07
> 
> The memo has been proposed to extend happy eyeballs algorithm to fit
> into multiple interfaces environment.  Based on this extended
> heuristic algorithm, a client with multiple interface could determine
> the optimal flow path in which specific interface has been chosen.
> Furthermore, an appropriate IP address family for each interface can
> be also identified to guarantee user experiences during IPv6
> transition period.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chen-mif-happy-eyeballs-
> extension-00.txt
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> Please kindly review it.
> Comments are welcome.
> 
> 
> BRs
> 
> Gang
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> mif@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif