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.
My point is that if say the spacing is 10ms and the RTT is 100ms, you
will needlessly be trying many pairs (up to 10) before you realize that
perhaps the first you tried actually works.
I would prefer the spacing to be >RTT so that you don't try a new
connection (with a new SYN) when the previous actually works.
Stig
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
