Re: [multipathtcp] Multipath TCP Address advertisement 5/5 - Communities

Alan Ford <alan.ford@gmail.com> Mon, 14 November 2016 07:29 UTC

Return-Path: <alan.ford@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476A21296A7 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:29:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VI8PKYjvi8sZ for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:29:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22d.google.com (mail-pg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A327E129554 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:29:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id x23so48347324pgx.1 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:29:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=jrmw2vM8oAIidBGP/KXj7muGn4eZtAczFLJ4YTph+GE=; b=pVW0ZVf7YivBS/dPgnZaYTKClpautRWOhjt9yVJ53hludLyNgwUje6cTHLBOFThRyT Ru395hMSaERoEWerep/N8vg3aNm8O6KN7BkDIugySTCX15r5Tew6Pu8K/oKZLMxVMDzx DgkCP4uyQ71nvTUq0sv4HcKSPkP6HTNpz6FE58NJK6fOlgXefaaBjZ4kcoC7KBeikch1 KJETTzHjBThCf50QakqtDC6AN25rDwgC1xD/AZsYpnhGFeZB5TiwFpZzgrxmhruQD9Y8 vXw2OD3cwte7xtPh9dywTUs3lo3lRgP16e8TFwFxVgz+IbGEGpPZIAy7UX4MnC0v0kRe nUng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=jrmw2vM8oAIidBGP/KXj7muGn4eZtAczFLJ4YTph+GE=; b=VfMKymZyM6eebSIASjY1o9HvbwfF2sEI7AwXjDghMNvU9Jo5RjvvkkwzgcoZjodrpl 0OYCXYJvFyLxv4jAAqW5lWVyaTApEG8tPnIZ+6vecM6CXsYhf2hqsPcG1d6ADch/iGZ/ wEbagsVh5Yo7EiI1FddhJr6N8r5h7ABOLudvM4OV4b88XYHD5YC/1s4C0xKasgFWsrPB u+95R8y7DHzlw+OjyPdFwSrZbJRdu9xwAH1ShRKe/UMv99CVy1Ve0GJlbRBp0E9L6wLG b2DgZvKPErMSs0+Y73pqklUNjcamDUDuSUGqSLYns0Q2x7yFcbgJlcHN3aHf/wXVv5g+ HN/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvd+JiHlJ6+nUWfU7LeQ0nnH+2+VHhzwv22Fr9XRTcy434XU8BZwmfLHOL3zWbYWFQ==
X-Received: by 10.99.245.21 with SMTP id w21mr10943002pgh.5.1479108543247; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:29:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-8fca.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-8fca.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.143.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a22sm32704570pfg.7.2016.11.13.23.29.01 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:29:02 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alan Ford <alan.ford@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e88a58d6-a468-e22c-4ec4-81c6698b7cbe@uclouvain.be>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 07:28:59 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <52DBDDD0-45D1-414F-91CF-67E29B6D58F3@gmail.com>
References: <581F243E.2050900@uclouvain.be> <DFC6E044-74AD-42FC-8450-C5910083BC35@gmail.com> <e88a58d6-a468-e22c-4ec4-81c6698b7cbe@uclouvain.be>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Fabien_Duch=C3=AAne?= <fabien.duchene@uclouvain.be>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/9laPdIqpwtcZImtD7vmKTXxKpIA>
Cc: "multipathtcp@ietf.org" <multipathtcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Multipath TCP Address advertisement 5/5 - Communities
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/multipathtcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 07:29:05 -0000

You could advertise it with your ‘backup’ bit in proposal 3/5 :-)

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 07:09, Fabien Duchêne <fabien.duchene@uclouvain.be> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/14/2016 04:05 PM, Alan Ford wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> But if you as a server know your IPv6 and IPv4 share a path, you may choose not to use one or the other. Same for the client. So under what circumstances does signalling this to the far end actually help?
> mm thinking about it:
> let's say that you have a v4 and a v6 that share a path, so you don't announce the v6. What happen if the v4 fails if you didn't announce your v6?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> multipathtcp mailing list
> multipathtcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp