[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Architecture [Re: Agenda for Vienna]

On donderdag, mei 15, 2003, at 14:02 Europe/Amsterdam, Masataka Ohta wrote:

In this draft you say TCP (and other protocols, leaving those alone for
a moment) should get multiple addresses from the application.


Well, basically, I say hosts should have multiple addresses. It is,
of course, at IP layer.




What I mean is that when an applications wants to connect to an 
application on another host, the first application has to find all the 
addresses for the correspondent host and give them to TCP so that TCP 
can start a session.



I don't think this is the right approach. Applications should only work 
with one thing that identifiers the other end and not worry what 
happens on the network.



(BTW, how does the second host learn the alternative addresses for the 
first host?)




I feel this approach isn't a good one both for architectural reasons
and for deployment reasons (this simply needs too many changes to too
many things).





It is architecuturally of course that a change at the IP layer
affects many things.



It shouldn't.




As for deployment, change is optionaly.




All of the stuff we're discussing right now needs support from both 
ends in order for multihoming on one end to work. This means change is 
NOT optional, we need to get at least 95% of the internet to adopt this 
or we have failed.