On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Francis Dupont wrote: > In theory, yes. But the question is, does it really make that much of a > difference as long as at least one way is "unoptimized"? > > => the same difference than when both ways are unoptimized or optimized. > Difference in distance is the same, difference in byte overhead too. > This is true for all points with one exception: protocol complexity > because triangular routing has roughly the same complexity than > bidirectional tunneling.
What about latency (e.g. interactive session) detected by the user? (might be the worst of the two) Reliability is one argument too. > Practice? I don't think there's much difference in bidir > tunnel/triangular routing; I doubt e.g. TCP would be able to get much > better performance from triangular than from bi-dir (and there are goals > like hiding your origins that triangular cannot solve). > > => I can't see how TCP is involved. I believe your argument is different: > if the traffic is very asymmetrical (more on one way than on the other), > you prefer to have it on the optimized way... I think I'd prefer to have it either _completely optimized_ or _completely unoptimized_, not optimized to one direction and unoptimized to the other. > I am afraid the real argument against the triangular routing is this > discussion itself because the main triangular routing advantage comes > from the (future) fact that HAO is supported by every IPv6 nodes. > With enough FUD this shall never become true and the advantage shall vanish... Yes. But in all reality, a user who requires mobility (e.g. moving fast) would be a fool to rely that all CN's would implement this (or else the connection breaks) during the next 3 years or so.. Triangular routing relies on the existance of this feature everywhere. Bidirectional tunneling always works, and in practise *may* (I don't know) be roughly equal in user-detected latency, TCP thoughput, etc. Does it not seem Bidir is far superior to triangular routing? (As a matter of fact, bidir does not really even require MIPv6 -- I don't think there's any feature missing in current specifications that would be required :-). -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
