[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Transport multihoming
Why would we do that rather than rolling out SCTP? I can imagine an
API trick to make SCTP look like TCP to a legacy app.
The notion that we can solve it without host stack mods is pretty
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> Greg, Peter,
> As I see it, the reason to have the multihoming functionality inside one
> or more transport protocols is that the transport layer has end-to-end
> knowledge that makes it possible to make better multihoming decisions.
> Would it be possible to have a modified TCP talk to a non-modified TCP
> through some kind of "mudem" (multihomer/demultihomer), without loss of
> the core multihoming functionality, and without the "mudem" having to
> keep long-term state?
> This would create a much more attractive deployment path as people can
> choose to either upgrade hosts or put them behind a box to provide the
> multihoming functionality.
> It also makes it possible to move the multihoming decision making to a
> place where it can be better controlled if this is desired.
> Iljitsch (or just call me dr. Frankenstein)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM
On assignment at the IBM Zurich Laboratory, Switzerland