On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student) wrote: > > However, with multihoming, the change may be a common occurance > > throughtout the lifetime of a connection depending on the application and > > the use of the multiple paths (failover, concurrent multipath transfer, > > etc). So TCP (or whatever transport) should not be blind to the fact that > > data is potentially going over a different path. Otherwise, the congestion > > control parameters/algorithms will not work properly. > > I agree. But, as you mention in an other mail, TCP/SCTP/DCCP has a limit to > do simultaneous tranfer. It is impossible to provide concurrent multipath > transfer without changing the cc algorithms. Yes, I never meant to imply that the cc algorithms could remain the same. I just wanted to point out that concurrent multipath transfer (CMT) can not be done well without multihoming support at the transport. At UD, we (in particular, Jana Iyengar) are investigating CMT in multihomed transports (ie, SCTP) so that only the sender has to modify it's cc algorithms to remain Internet-friendly. > But, given current options, transport is the better judge to do zero > click fail-over. Yes, I think so. ~armando 0-- --0 | Armando L. Caro Jr. | Protocol Engineering Lab | | www.armandocaro.net | University of Delaware | 0-- --0