Re: [multipathtcp] Multipath Address Family

[Christian Vogt <[e-mail]>]

On Nov 30, 2009, Yoshifumi Nishida wrote:

>> After my presentation [1] of name-based sockets at the RRG meeting in
>> Hiroshima, several RRG participants suggested such a wider discussion. 
>> The idea was to initiate the discussion with a presentation on name-
>> based sockets at the Applications area, Transport area, or Internet area
>> open meeting in March.  Would folks in this working group support such a
>> presentation?
>> 
>> - Christian
>> 
>> [1] http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/RRG-2.pdf
> 
> With this API, is it possible for applications to specify something
> like  "stream service" instead of specifying trasnport protocol? 


Indeed, Yoshifumi.  And there is flexibility regarding which such
"transport services" applications should be able to explicitly select.
The current version of the paper defines only one service:  stream- 
orientation as opposed to datagram-orientation.  This could be extended
to enable the explicit selection of additional services, such as
reliability or even congestion control.  The current limitation to one
service is a pragmatic choice, which is based on today's small choice of
transport protocols.  But I agree that an ability to define more
services could foster the deployment of new transport protocols.

- Christian