IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-vyncke-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-cookie-00.txt

"Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Wed, 29 October 2014 21:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176E41A907C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no
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 bSw9Ii40pHhi for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.sbone.de (mx1.sbone.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:130:3ffc::401:25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 667421A8750 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sbone.de (mail.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:587]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3188A25D3A91; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:28:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from content-filter.sbone.de (content-filter.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:2742]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07707C77057; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:28:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sbone.de
Received: from mail.sbone.de ([IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:587]) by content-filter.sbone.de (content-filter.sbone.de [fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:2742]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JoDeuG9_y1f8; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:28:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:4420:cabc:c8ff:fe8b:4fe6] (orange-tun0-ula.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:4420:cabc:c8ff:fe8b:4fe6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2A73CC77042; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:28:51 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAKC-DJg+G59rjwj-UX0zGj01KLvq9Ark1sL=pVytGT0znC2BmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:28:47 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <929CBC54-691A-4D35-AAF5-1F02C7D84073@lists.zabbadoz.net>
References: <20141027195522.23487.548.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5A5248BF-9E86-4B90-B344-C2DE1A3A8B56@cisco.com> <CAKC-DJhMf72D4wUcSL1_t_mSBLHotNm2KPE4v8OW94wfpHMN5w@mail.gmail.com> <D0771643.30804%evyncke@cisco.com> <CAKC-DJg+G59rjwj-UX0zGj01KLvq9Ark1sL=pVytGT0znC2BmQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Nygren <erik+ietf@nygren.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Q7_qHg6zGuHasnsK9BMcJcIWb64
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-vyncke-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-cookie-00.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:29:00 -0000

On 29 Oct 2014, at 21:25 , Erik Nygren <erik+ietf@nygren.org> wrote:

> 2) the classes of multi-homing that cause problems here and how all of them are increasing (happy eyeballs for dual-stack, privacy addressing, multi-link multi-homing, load balanced proxies, load balanced NATs, ...)
> 
> With the summary that because of the increases in #2, it is strongly advised not to do #1 anymore.
> 
> Questions sometimes come up on whether there are good technical solutions, such as ways clients can force outbound connections across each link to build up some sort of "association record" that glues the various IP addresses together, but that is more of an apps-area topic, and also don't work with some of the above.

I would phrase that differently as “I want predictable, deterministic behaviour and not magic”.


— 
Bjoern A. Zeeb             "Come on. Learn, goddamn it.", WarGames, 1983

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email