Subject: RE: [Mobike] issue #16

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:23:04 +0200

Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> Tschofenig Hannes wrote:
> | hi all,
> |
> | i guess we can close issue # 16:
> | "Can the protocol recover from situations where the only
> | sign of problems is lack of packets from the other end?"
> | http://www.vpnc.org/ietf-mobike/issue16.txt
> 
> Internet paths that are silent aren't problems, IMO. They're 
> just idle network paths.
> 
> This sounds like a job for a link layer, and I don't think 
> mobike needs to be a link layer.

Perhaps the issue was a bit inaccurately named, but it was 
really about the case where DPD fails: we're sending an IKEv2 
request, but don't receive a reply from the other end (even 
after retransmitting the request several times).

(This is of course quite different from idle network path.)

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