> > TCP has the problem that it simply can't be used with an > anycast address > without changing the protocol or somehow handling the binding > transparently on L3 (as in MIPv6). UDP doesn't have this problem; at > most the applications need to be changed to react correctly to peer > address change.
=> But is this the only problem? I mean even if there is a way of making apps using UDP react correctly to address changes, is it not possible that some apps would want to make sure that they are still talking to the _same_peer_ and not just the same application on another host? > Some of the problems relate to figuring out what > constitutes a session > with a UDP application. => There was a reference made that the draft deals with stateful applications. Hesham -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
