Re: delayed multihoming/mobility set-up

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> >   Or, is it necessary to ensure connection survivability in parallel with
> >   the connection establishment?
> 
> Because of race conditions, it does not ensure anything.

Did I suggest it would *ensure* it?

But if the probability of a multihoming related problem increases in 
proportion to the time passed for a connection/flow-of-packets, what this 
is doing:

 - optimizing away multihoming overhead when it isn't necessary (i.e., by 
the definition of user, that is, the triggers it uses, when it feels that 
the multihoming benefits outweigh its setup costs)

 - still giving a possibility to get the multihoming benefits when the 
user feels they're useful/required, with no overhead with the rest.

> >   Or even, is it OK to just ensure connection survivability only for
> >   "long-lived" sessions (e.g., those which have lasted for longer than 5
> >   minutes), using some definition.
> 
> There is no proper timeout value at the IP layer.

Right, but with IPv6, there is flow label.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings