Hi,
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 01:23:37PM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Probe results should probably
be cached for a while and interpreted per-prefix not per-address.
I agree in principle, just wonder how big the prefix boundary for
per-prefix should be... (and I can make cases for a /32
On 22.12.2014, at 11.54, Gert Doering g...@space.net wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 01:23:37PM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Probe results should probably
be cached for a while and interpreted per-prefix not per-address.
I agree in principle, just wonder how big the prefix boundary for
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:48:50PM +, Markus Stenberg wrote:
be cached for a while and interpreted per-prefix not per-address.
I agree in principle, just wonder how big the prefix boundary for
per-prefix should be... (and I can make cases for a /32 should be
good enough??? or
On 22.12.2014, at 13.04, Gert Doering g...@space.net wrote:
I was actually looking the other way, destination space - if you know
that for, say, 2001:608::1 the path over ISP A is better (for whatever
local metric), everything else inside 2001:608::/32 will have the same
result for the same
Probe results should probably [be] interpreted per-prefix not per-address.
Hmm. Interesting idea.
I can imagine some scenarios where it could break -- Ethernet bridged with
Wifi (OpenWRT style), mesh networks, or simply a congested, bufferbloated
interface. I'm not sure how common such
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:
Probe results should probably [be] interpreted per-prefix not per-address.
Hmm. Interesting idea.
+1. Pick one of dhcp, slaac, or privacy within a prefix with the best
lifetime, maybe?
I can imagine
I can imagine some scenarios where it could break -- Ethernet bridged with
Wifi (OpenWRT style),
If you have two hosts connected to an OpenWRT router, one over Wifi and
one over Ethernet, they could have very different performance
characteristics while being on the same prefix.
expound?
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 03:18:47PM +0100, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
If you have two hosts connected at different places to the same mesh
network, they could have very different performance characteristics while
having addresses from the same /64.
Indeed, that's the other end of the
On 23/12/2014 03:22, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 03:18:47PM +0100, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
If you have two hosts connected at different places to the same mesh
network, they could have very different performance characteristics while
having addresses from the same /64.
Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
On the other hand, if we end up having hundreds of addresses on every
host, the strategy will need to be rethought. Dave is currently playing
with a network where each host has 10 addresses of different kinds, and
he's
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/12/2014 04:07, Michael Richardson wrote:
I am way behind on my mail (this thread) and will be away for the holidays.
Merry Christmas, everyone, and to all a happy new year!
Dave,
my take is that
11 matches
Mail list logo
