> The RR mechanism for anycast already requires the ability to use
> the anycast address as a source address. If we can get agreement
> on lifting that restriction, I like the idea of keeping changes
> out of TCP.
Well you don't actually want it lifted. You don't want a
anycast address being used to *initiate* a transaction.
You do however want to be able to *reply* using the anycast
address. For UDP this is will need to be enforced at the
application layer, perhaps with an setsockopt so that the
application can inform the stack that it knows that this
is *potentially* a anycast addresss. For TCP this can be
enforced lower down the stack.
e.g.
bind(fd, <anycast>);
connect(fd, <unicast>);
should fail but
int yes = 1;
bind(fd, <anycast>);
setsockopt(fd, ANYCASTSEND, &yes, sizeof(yes));
sendto(fd, <unicast>);
should succeed as should
bind(fd, <anycast>);
listen(fd, 3)
fd2 = accept(fd);
write(fd2, ...);
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
