IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Fabien Duchêne <fabien.duchene@uclouvain.be> Mon, 14 November 2016 07:50 UTC

Return-Path: <fabien.duchene@uclouvain.be>
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 E4733128874 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:50:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=uclouvain.be
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 xBJRdxaSh7mY for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:50:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp2.sgsi.ucl.ac.be (smtp.sgsi.ucl.ac.be [130.104.5.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C0101294AB for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 23:50:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [31.133.134.81] (dhcp-8651.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.134.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: duchenef@smtp2.sgsi.ucl.ac.be) by smtp2.sgsi.ucl.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 651FB67D9DD; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 08:50:01 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 smtp2.sgsi.ucl.ac.be 651FB67D9DD
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=uclouvain.be; s=selucl; t=1479109802; bh=5Pw2KNe7sf0LKM/W6zxwrzho541Wuo6hcbmamG4gSh4=; h=From:Subject:To:References:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To; b=xBGrLiWonKuTGpRM9uCQVcJQ70HtaKe1a0fenwdhcYqCQrun8Kcm9JsLp83UJ7FBL xzR0ZtfnMiIZ5KvUk0Ec7/GLqkIl0sMZUBwCTruXUgNFl+5bfX8Aoo1u4Qnq6xUSE8 56g5YJVDtP6omvWFFPHUbyc5n/CWIwKxWKaeMJjY=
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at smtp-2
From: Fabien Duchêne <fabien.duchene@uclouvain.be>
To: Alan Ford <alan.ford@gmail.com>
References: <581F243E.2050900@uclouvain.be> <DFC6E044-74AD-42FC-8450-C5910083BC35@gmail.com> <e88a58d6-a468-e22c-4ec4-81c6698b7cbe@uclouvain.be> <52DBDDD0-45D1-414F-91CF-67E29B6D58F3@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <513ae7c7-43b5-09a4-0cdc-9367caf71efd@uclouvain.be>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 16:49:58 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <52DBDDD0-45D1-414F-91CF-67E29B6D58F3@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Sgsi-Spamcheck: SASL authenticated,
X-SGSI-Information:
X-SGSI-MailScanner-ID: 651FB67D9DD.A444A
X-SGSI-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-SGSI-From: fabien.duchene@uclouvain.be
X-SGSI-Spam-Status: No
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/dZZNBhU34I82wJdaNMZD0ScRxAg>
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 07:50:11 -0000

Yep, that was my first thought, now the thing that bothers me here is 
the following:

You have 2 interfaces. Each does have v4 and v6 (like a lot of 
smartphones today).
So you use the v4's and advertise the v6's with the backup bit from 
proposal 3.

One of the v4 breaks, now you have 2 v6s that you could "unbackup" but 
which one do you "unbackup"?
You don't know which v6 is related to the v4 you just lost.


Fabien



On 11/14/2016 04:28 PM, Alan Ford wrote:
> You could advertise it with your ‘backup’ bit in proposal 3/5

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email