Re: [rrg] RRG to hibernation

[Scott Brim <[e-mail]>]

On 11/13/12 03:21, Tony Li allegedly wrote:
> 
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Christian Huitema <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>>> No.  Today if you have a set of PA prefixes and your address changes from
>> one
>>> to another, your TCP connections all break.
>>
>> That's true, has been for quite some time, and yet nobody seems to be doing
>> much about it. Which makes you wonder how big of a problem that is in
>> practice. If applications were really hurting, you would hear complaints
>> from application developers. But you don't. The applications that need
>> reliable long duration sessions incorporate some trivial checkpoint and
>> restart mechanism, or some pretty elaborate consistency protocols for big
>> databases. They probably would do that no matter what the reliability of
>> TCP, as long as it is not "perfect." And PA renumbering is probably not very
>> high in their list of "stuff that occasionally break TCP."
> 
> 
> They don't do PA renumbering.  They do PI instead.  Clearly checkpoint and restart are not sufficient, otherwise they could do PA easily.

I don't know who "they" is but applications that want to be robust
across network changes have their own identity-related functions.  They
have done their own loc/id split, for the identities that matter to them
(app/session level), and use it to sustain sessions.  They don't care
about or need what this list is talking about.

swb