On 02/13/2018 08:04 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote:
> Yes, I think this topic is very relevant to the work that can be done in
> updated transport APIs, specifically around Path Selection. This is
> relevant both for initial connection establishment (when we’re racing
> various transport protocols across different paths, we need to know
> which local addresses to use), and maintenance of connections that
> support migration or multipath (which addresses can they use for new
> flows). The address selection can also be inferred from other properties
> of the transport connection, such as how long-lived the connection needs
> to be.
> Fernando, what’s your plan for your draft? It seems like a great
> reference for our drafts, and something we need to consider in our list
> of application preferences when creating transport connections.
Thanks so much for your comments!
I this work is of interest to the TAPS WG, we could try to move this one
forward in this wg, and also think of a subsequent I-D with
recommendations (more on this later).
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
Taps mailing list