Re: multi6-functional-dec and re-homing

[marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>]

El 20/01/2005, a las 10:16, Brian E Carpenter escribió:

> john.loughney@nokia.com wrote:
> > Brian,
> > > Focussing:
> > >
> > >
> > > > In particular, the benefits would be the capability of establishing
> > > > new communications through the alternative paths.
> > >
> > > Well, that is an intrinsic property of IPv6 surely - if a host has
> > > two addresses, and one fails, you can try the other.
> > Yes, but the TCP session running will be torn down.  This implies the
> > need for a shim layer, but I'm guessing Marcelo was suggesting that
> > there may still mechanisms help with this case.  Am I correct in
> > assuming that you think this is out of scope?
>
> Well, I find it hard to see how a single-ended shim can help, unless
> it actually turns out to be an in-host NAT, and I don't think we want
> to go there, do we?

I agree that a single host that has SHIM components cannot preserve 
established communications (since for this support from both ends of 
the communication is needed).
However, if one of the nodes has SHIM components, it may be able to 
establish new communications after an outage, something that a non SHIM 
host cannot. and this is a great benefit imho

Reagrds, marcelo

>    Brian