[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on draft-ietf-shim6-proto-00.txt
El 05/10/2005, a las 19:27, Spencer Dawkins escribió:
Another missing discussion: the document refers to
SCTP as if it would be obvious how it can use Shim6. I'm
not sure that's the case. Or at least its not obvious to me :-)
Just a minor point here - I'm assuming that SCTP would work over Shim6
if an SCTP implementation was Shim6-unaware; the "IPv6 addresses"
included in SCTP Init and Init-ACK chunks would work even if a Shim6
added locators for these identifiers "under the covers".
I've been seeing references to "turning Shim6 OFF for SCTP", since
SCTP is capable of handling its own multihoming, but I don't think
anything is particularly BROKEN if SCTP is naively using identifiers
as if they were locators. My understanding is that we're talking about
efficiency, not correct operation, when we talk about Shim6 and SCTP
in this context.
I have the same understanding about how this should work.
I guess the point is that we have to make sure that this is so, and for
this we need to analyze in detail how this shim-sctp interaction would
be. For that we need shim and sctp expertise but from what i have seen
i think there are many folks involved in sctp around, so i would expect
that this analysis is properly performed
As Jari pointed out, Shim6 is closely tied to IPv6, but I note that
SCTP supports both IPv4 and IPv6 multihoming - this could be an
incentive to use SCTP instead of Shim6 for multihoming (if both are
available, and if there's a knob to "turn Shim6 OFF for SCTP").
Do others have a different understanding?