IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com> Wed, 04 June 2014 10:57 UTC

Return-Path: <scott.brim@gmail.com>
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 279471A029F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 03:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 mYLzFiePmZwZ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 03:57:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-x22a.google.com (mail-oa0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D07CE1A030B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 03:57:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id j17so7748769oag.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 03:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=MPb3Z290b1Xxoyum2l7ec2qUfChJYrJPlKvswQxp0yk=; b=gQO2li21/OIdn/Xgw2Dd9T44KeFsUtlZUimUL4rqoWAIQKSbeSCN4dma6WcyfTT1zc QvRGTRsu0J/OahOH87opS264kPyuOkHpbf/mE1lmYw32mo2tMqQFx778sC6ONm9j/bWo JVgDAnJ5P/g5mjmyl8VY7oXXTvZxWOgnVcH70XyngfKHiG4XMApe1/5fSadXMVP195Kz 3tDNA9+9J02ugahwznv+PmZ9erWBDNzSGPC0r/SgtnFo1J6buf1CHgB7uyEZ7HaywEUv uV4l55sKMS74RcuNRp0sQUaPNzcUOjPKc44mYRjcn7zaDchuxljglCsdq4nIIT2zuGUt J9QA==
X-Received: by 10.60.101.170 with SMTP id fh10mr55746862oeb.39.1401879460739; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 03:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.183.8.7 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 03:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <538EF96E.8070300@uclouvain.be>
References: <2A4B72CD-EDF3-4D11-AC39-B65892F9173F@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr2NH4Kca4EvhjN2XnDbt8F2eS56ipxu3npH9yOh1bmQaA@mail.gmail.com> <F12F173B-9FF2-4EF8-B11E-33AEDA24961F@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr1cGx7UfxZaEhm7oHA5PLvghVc52oPVkEQF90_7Vm__vw@mail.gmail.com> <1FDC3A7F-15EC-4397-AF3E-10F86EA04228@nominum.com> <538BDA84.6030800@bogus.com> <37D09BEE-FEDF-4514-8CEB-62959A89C3FF@nominum.com> <538BE13C.7050900@bogus.com> <20140602081743.GP46558@Space.Net> <538CE1CF.9030002@gmail.com> <20140602204730.GH46558@Space.Net> <538D7A71.6070906@uclouvain.be> <538E2D2E.4020903@gmail.com> <CAPv4CP_S61spd-QWgrGiDo0i5cpeuz2WUAr8__s=AWPF-6-HDw@mail.gmail.com> <538E32D0.9050005@gmail.com> <CAPv4CP93=r-VRSgpbVjmy-gy6fuZ6GE_gFO5jwPxytX1htRpkw@mail.gmail.com> <538EF96E.8070300@uclouvain.be>
From: Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:57:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPv4CP9OpPvvpxHQspvKh6-jjnRxxO8v78fO4jGiESP1rGO1nQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be" <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/QbXkAvkWO4ipq375xF4hSP0LTrA
Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-3a@u-1.phicoh.com>, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] source address failover [PI [ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks]]
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, 04 Jun 2014 10:57:48 -0000

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Olivier Bonaventure
<Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be> wrote:
>>> My point is that there are useful learnings in shim6 as well as in MPTCP
>>> and SCTP. However, it will be very sad if we have to re-solve these
>>> problems in every application suite rather than solving them once
>>> in the stack.
>>
>> Got it. Agree completely. But looking at the momentum, I'm betting on
>> higher layers. Content is driving the bus.
>
> I'd prefer transport than application. The problem with solving multihoming
> or other issues at the application layer is that this is complex and
> requires a lot of networking expertise. Some app developpers
> have this expertise, but they are the minority. We should not expect each
> app developper to have to deal with multihoming, the stack should solve the
> issue. This is the same problem as for reliability. We've placed reliability
> in the transport layer so that applications can built upon it. There are
> niche applications that want to reinvent reliable delivery, but this is not
> the best utilisation of scarce developper time...
>
> Olivier

Olivier: yes but there is tremendous momentum in user space / apps.
... but we digress.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email