Re: [rrg] RRG to hibernation

"Christian Huitema" <huitema@huitema.net> Tue, 13 November 2012 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27FEB21F88D1 for <rrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:49:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.463
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.277, BAYES_20=-0.74]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P7XWLP64st53 for <rrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:49:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xsmtp03.mail2web.com (xsmtp03.mail2web.com [168.144.250.223]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FD4921F88B8 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:49:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.5.2.17] (helo=xmail07.myhosting.com) by xsmtp03.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1TYBFh-0005oz-T6 for rrg@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 02:49:47 -0500
Received: (qmail 18457 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2012 07:49:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO icebox) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[24.18.205.153]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail07.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <dykim@cnu.kr>; 13 Nov 2012 07:49:43 -0000
From: "Christian Huitema" <huitema@huitema.net>
To: "'Tony Li'" <tony.li@tony.li>, "'Dae Young KIM'" <dykim@cnu.kr>
References: <20121112234012.05F8E18C0CA@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <CAFgODJcP1zvwRJukJdnqjSR-78XAMB1nSxL32gjUQB+NqpgESg@mail.gmail.com> <50A18F75.8060001@joelhalpern.com> <CAFgODJcDAzaYPrWFEJhgeCjnN_M9tdd+pdHTiccd=Dz=1mYrLg@mail.gmail.com> <EC8FD781-E416-4AE6-BA99-F74FE2DDA14D@tony.li> <CAFgODJfMBJBxNJ_M1_L=K0f2DpbZvzOBUgLZ6sT+-y+JevGeSg@mail.gmail.com> <27E72BC2-C84D-469F-9667-7A749567B477@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <27E72BC2-C84D-469F-9667-7A749567B477@tony.li>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:49:41 -0800
Message-ID: <09cc01cdc173$71323cd0$5396b670$@huitema.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQKmaqimcuMIEaDS4+m+D6OTBfD6uwEJqFf5AlYTT+gB3vf1+gMMZiYcAUxrLhkCUOa8uJXWzBUQ
Cc: rrg@irtf.org
Subject: Re: [rrg] RRG to hibernation
X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <rrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg>
List-Post: <mailto:rrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:49:49 -0000

> 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."

-- Christian Huitema