> On Nov 25, 2021, at 12:06 , Michael Thomas wrote:
>
>
> On 11/25/21 11:54 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> Christopher Morrow writes:
>>
>>> Also, for completeness, MP-TCP clearly does not help UDP or ICMP flows...
>>> nor IPSEC nor GRE nor...
>>> unless you HTTP over MP-TCP and encap
On 11/25/21 11:54 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Christopher Morrow writes:
Also, for completeness, MP-TCP clearly does not help UDP or ICMP flows...
nor IPSEC nor GRE nor...
unless you HTTP over MP-TCP and encap UDP/ICMP/GRE/IPSEC over that!
IP over DNS has been a thing forever. IP over DoH
Christopher Morrow writes:
> Also, for completeness, MP-TCP clearly does not help UDP or ICMP flows...
> nor IPSEC nor GRE nor...
> unless you HTTP over MP-TCP and encap UDP/ICMP/GRE/IPSEC over that!
IP over DNS has been a thing forever. IP over DoH should work just
fine.
> Talk about layer
Baldur Norddahl wrote:
Are you proposing SCTP? There is sadly not much more hope for widespread
adoption of that as of IPv6.
My ID describes the architectural framework both for IPv4 and IPv6.
Modification to TCP is discussed, for example, in:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 5:12 PM Geoff Huston wrote:
>
>
> > On 25 Nov 2021, at 7:57 am, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> >
> > Are you proposing SCTP? There is sadly not much more hope for widespread
> adoption of that as of IPv6.
> >
> > or perhaps MP-TCP? :) or shim6?
>
> Shim6 died a
> On 25 Nov 2021, at 7:57 am, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
> Are you proposing SCTP? There is sadly not much more hope for widespread
> adoption of that as of IPv6.
>
> or perhaps MP-TCP? :) or shim6?
Shim6 died a comprehensive death many yers ago. I recall NANOG played a role in
it's
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 9:12 AM Baldur Norddahl
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 08:16, Masataka Ohta <
> mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>> So, as modifying end systems is inevitable, there is
>> no reason not to support full end to end multihoming
>> including modifications to
On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 16:16, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> Are you proposing SCTP? There is sadly not much more hope for widespread
> adoption of that as of IPv6.
If you use Apple, you use MP-TCP, for better UX while using both
mobile and wifi.
SCTP is no good, because you cannot transition
On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 08:16, Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> So, as modifying end systems is inevitable, there is
> no reason not to support full end to end multihoming
> including modifications to support multiple addresses
> by TCP and some applications.
>
>
Dave Taht wrote:
The proper solution is to have end to end multihoming:
https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-02.txt
I'd never read that. We'd made openwrt in particular use "source
specific routing" for ipv6 by default,
many years ago, but I don't know to what extent
10 matches
Mail list logo