[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Shim6 failure recovery after garbage collection




On 17-Apr-2006, at 20:11, Erik Nordmark wrote:

Joe Abley wrote:

One of the more comprehensible objections to shim6 that was raised at NANOG 35 was from large content providers who currently serve many thousands of simultaneous clients through load balancers or other content-aggregation devices (the kind of devices which switch connections to origin servers without having to store any locally).

But when I watched the Nanog movie on that session, there seemed to be a prevailing confusion that shim6 would setup state for every TCP connection, when in fact its state is per IP address pair.

Yeah. I was referring to conversations I had afterwards in hallways, not to the shouting match itself.


Joe