[154083] in North American Network Operators' Group
IPv6 Multi-homing (was IPv6 /64 links)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Douglas Otis)
Mon Jun 25 13:11:32 2012
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 10:09:11 -0700
From: Douglas Otis <dotis@mail-abuse.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <F7D8D384-99DA-453A-8A77-DB89A5CAC9E1@delong.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 6/25/12 7:54 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> It would have been better if IETF had actually solved this instead
> of punting on it when developing IPv6.
Dear Owen,
The IETF offered a HA solution that operates at the transport level. It
solves jumbo frame error detection rate issues, head of queue
blocking, instant fail-over, better supports high data rates with
lower overhead, offers multi-homing transparently across
multiple providers, offers fast setup and anti-packet source spoofing.
The transport is SCTP, used by every cellular tower and for
media distribution.
This transport's improved error detection is now supported in hardware
by current network adapters and processors. Conversely, TCP suffers
from high undetected stuck bit errors, head of queue blocking, complex
multi-homing, slow setup, high process overhead and is prone to source
spoofing. It seems OS vendors rather than the IETF hampered progress in
this area. Why band-aid on a solved problem?
Regards,
Douglas Otis
