On 11/13/12 03:21, Tony Li allegedly wrote: > > On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Christian Huitema <huit...@huitema.net> wrote: > >>> No. Today if you have a set of PA prefixes and your address changes from >> one >>> to another, your TCP connections all break. >> >> That's true, has been for quite some time, and yet nobody seems to be doing >> much about it. Which makes you wonder how big of a problem that is in >> practice. If applications were really hurting, you would hear complaints >> from application developers. But you don't. The applications that need >> reliable long duration sessions incorporate some trivial checkpoint and >> restart mechanism, or some pretty elaborate consistency protocols for big >> databases. They probably would do that no matter what the reliability of >> TCP, as long as it is not "perfect." And PA renumbering is probably not very >> high in their list of "stuff that occasionally break TCP." > > > They don't do PA renumbering. They do PI instead. Clearly checkpoint and > restart are not sufficient, otherwise they could do PA easily.
I don't know who "they" is but applications that want to be robust across network changes have their own identity-related functions. They have done their own loc/id split, for the identities that matter to them (app/session level), and use it to sustain sessions. They don't care about or need what this list is talking about. swb _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
