Re: [v6ops] source address failover [PI [ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks]]

[Scott Brim <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Having worked actively with both shim6 and Multipath TCP and supervised
>> their implementation in the Linux kernel, I'm convinced that solving the
>> problem in the transport layer is much better than in the network layer.
>> Multipath TCP can deal with the case that you discuss and we'd be happy
>> to perform tests with the Multipath TCP implementation in the Linux
>> kernel (see http://www.multipath-tcp.org )
>
> But, of course, the great advantage of shim6, as you know, is that it
> applies to all transport layers. MPTCP is very elegant but only works
> for TCP applications. So we have a bit of a dilemma in this area.
> It's not a v6ops issue though.

And the disadvantage of shim6 is that it's gone, sorry Brian but it's
not coming back. In the meantime, while MPTCP itself has little
deployment, the framework in it and SCTP are strongly present in HTTP
2.0, RTCWEB, and web browser space in general, and there is refreshing
work being done on transport layer improvements. If and when
multipathing proves its usefulness (imho the jury is still out, eg.
when you have paths with highly different quality) there will be
several convenient paths for its deployment.

Scott