On 2009-11-20 15:02, Scott Brim wrote: > Stig Venaas allegedly wrote on 11/18/2009 1:44 PM: >> Fred Baker wrote: >>> On Nov 18, 2009, at 6:22 PM, Arifumi Matsumoto wrote: >>> >>>> I guess that is because if you force to try all the pairs, it perfectly >>>> ignores the address selection manner defined in RFC 3484, and thus, >>>> it gives us not little impact. >>> If they space them closely and run them in parallel, I guess I don't >>> see the impact. Imagine you have five addresses and your peer has five >>> addresses, so there are 25 pairs. Imagine you are spacing the SYNs 10 >>> ms apart. Imagine that the only pair that works is the last one you try. >> I'm a bit worried about this. If e.g. the host is 100ms (RTT) away and >> 10 combinations work, you may end up creating TCP state (and getting >> syn-acks back) on the destination host for 10 connections, while you are >> only going to use one. > > I think the general sense is to try pairs until you get a few acceptable > ones, no more.
If you are polite, and use some sort of exponential backoff like REAP does, the time to discover a working pair can be quite long, unless your first or second guess is correct. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
