Excerpts from RJ Atkinson at 09:19:52 -0500 on Tue 9 Dec 2008: > SCTP is not the most widely used transport protocol. However, it is > deployed and it has real-world use today. I am reliably told that > the multi-homing capability is critical to most currently deployed > uses of SCTP.
Please refresh my memory: Does SCTP test liveness of inactive src/dst pairs on an ongoing basis? If TCP and UDP were replaced by SCTP, would the core be flooded with probe packets? > I am also mindful of Mark Handley's proposal for a multi-homed, > multi-path TCP extension. Such an extension seems sensible to me, > at least conceptually, particularly given that there are now > experimental results from SCTP indicating that such a thing can work > reasonably well. My favorite way of getting Mark to speak up is to speak for him, incorrectly, so here goes: It seems that their solution is to use src/dst pairs that give them good throughput, and also to keep a trickle of probes going on all others, even if they never get anything back. I don't know how they deal with asymmetric flows, which may be the critical issue. > > What is new is the opportunity to do something more with it given > > locator/identifier separation. > > Hmm. I'm not quite sure. > > > "Here's this cool new tool, but to use it you have to install new > > wiring in your house and by the way your electric bill will > > double." > > (I haven't finished my coffee yet, so maybe it is just me, but I > have no idea what that quoted text means. :-) Sorry. I mean we give a host this wonderful new tool called locator/identifier separation, but in order to use it it has to change its stack, change its API, implement at least one new control mechanism at some layer, maintain more state and exchange more control traffic. Scott _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
