Re: about R1bis

[Pierre Baume <pierre@baume.org>]

Marcelo,

On 11/11/05, marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es> wrote:
>
> El 11/11/2005, a las 17:16, Pierre Baume escribió:
[...]

> >   Maybe it would help to have a message for servers to indicate that
> > they wish to go quiet and drop the context. This could also interrupt
> > probing.
> >
>
> But in this case, the client wouldn't be able to use the probing for
> detecting failures, right?
> I guess that the optimal would be that the server reply to probes, but
> that it does not verify that they belong to a given context. IMHO this
> present no security issues, as long as these are probes to verify that
> the current path is still working. It is completelly different story if
> these are reachability tests perfromed before a rehoming
>
> regards, marcelo

  Well, I'm not sure that I understand the scenarios.

  If a server drops the context when it has nothing to send to a
client for a while, how can it resume communication, if needed?

  If the above isn't a problem, what is the benefit for a client to
try and detect failures before it has something (else than a probe) to
send to a server?

  Thanks for your patience. :-)

Pierre.