Scott Leibrand wrote:
IMO this is not a show-stopping problem, as TCP will throttle back fairly quickly, and the impact should be limited to approximately the depth of the slow link's buffer. That's not to say it's not worth addressing (in the TSVWG), but it doesn't seem to me like something that should hold up shim6...
My take is that shim6 should provide a notification mechanism that the transports can use to be told when there is a locator pair change. What the transports do when they are notified is presumably something that folks in the transport area can discuss, thus it isn't a show-stopper for shim6.
Erik