Re: Some small remarks for REAP

[Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@NLnetLabs.nl>]

Brian E Carpenter schreef:
> ...without shim6. So while it's always a bad thing to lose packets, I 
> don't
> see this as a fatal problem.
> > 2.
> > How much locators will a host use? Because the Shim6 context will be 
> > garbage collected after 5 minutes (according to 
> > draft-ietf-shim6-proto-08) and with the proposed constant values, 
> > only a maximum of fifteen different address pairs can be probed. In 
> > reality, this number will be smaller, since the ULP will probably 
> > time out after two minutes. So, if only two or three locators per 
> > host are going to be used, these constants seem to work fine. With 
> > more locators, the protocol will probably also work fine, but a host 
> > will maintain locators that are probably not going to be probed. That 
> > seems a bit inefficient.
>
> Which case do we want to optimize? A site that has a likely number of
> ISPs such as two or three, or a site that for some strange reason has 
> more?
>
> (I don't count the case of a highly virtualized host that has many
> virtual interface identifiers, because each virtual stack will
> need its own shim6 context anyway.)
>
>    Brian

Never said they were fatal problems, just thought they were worth 
mentioning ;-). About the second remark. I did not foresee how much 
locators a host is going to use. But if it is more than three, the 
interval between probing must be increased at lower rate (lower than 
doubling it), or some locators will never be probed.

Regards,

Matthijs Mekking