On 24-okt-2005, at 15:31, Jari Arkko wrote:
http://www.arkko.com/publications/shim6/draft-ietf-shim6-failure- detection-02.pdf (A .txt version exists as well but does not contain the state machine.)
Comments and suggestions appreciated, as always.
In your fourth example the first communication from B to A is to complain that B doesn't receive any data. That's not really possible... If B has nothing else to send, and it doesn't receive anything, it will just assume the link is idle. But A is sending and doesn't receive anything, so in this case A will start the reachability exploration at some point on its own.
I'm not sure an explicity "I see you" flag is necessary, but maybe it just functions as a "reply requested" flag...
I find the state diagram confusing: many of the states are non- obvious. I think it would be better to have a separate per-context state diagram along with another state diagram for the reachability testing. (Although in this draft you do not differentiate between per- context and host-wide behavior.)
It's amusing to see that the protocols each of us came up with are almost 100% different.
BTW, my last name is "Van Beijnum" (capitalization of the V changes depending on the presence of a first name or initials).
Iljitsch