Subject: RE: [Mobike] issue 11 -- window size

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 15:11:20 +0300

Tero Kivinen writes:

> Yes, I agree that doing probing of previously non-working 
> addresses, which now have unidirectional connection, can cause 
> the connection to loose packets in case there is NAT between both 
> connections we are trying to use. So I suggest we do not try to do 
> probing on that case, but simply start finding the working path only 
> after we know there is problem with current path.

I think it is useful to allow path testing even when the current
path is working, and the protocol should support doing this 
without disrupting ongoing communication (which does not seem
to be possible in your proposal).

(E.g., suppose we have two interfaces, one very fast and cheap, 
second one very slow and expensive. If the first one has a temporary 
problem, and we switch to the second one, we want to switch back 
when possible even if the second interface keeps on working forever.)

Best regards,
Pasi
_______________________________________________
Mobike mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike

---

From: Tero Kivinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:20:54 +0300

> to be possible in your proposal).

It is possible, the protocol just needs to be written so it supports
it. If you want to get it working with IKEv2 NAT-T you need to add
modify the NAT-T behavior when using MOBIKE little more (You need to
modify the NAT-T behavior in all cases)

> when possible even if the second interface keeps on working forever.)

Then you simply say that only N(MOVE TRAFFIC) is the only method of
updating the addresses. I.e. disable dynamic updating of IKEv2 NAT-T
(it is already allowed as dynamic update is SHOULD not MUST). 
-- 
[email-masked]
_______________________________________________
Mobike mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike