Mark Andrews wrote: > > Martin Rex writes: > > > > Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > > > More correctly it is try the first address and if that doesn't > > > connect in a short period (150...250ms) start a second connection > > > to the next address while continuing with the first. If you have > > > more that 2 address you do something similar for the next one > > > > Happy eyeballs means that a clients reaction to congestion is > > to perform an DoS attack, flood the network with additional > > connection requests and hammer the server with many additional > > half-open connections that will never actually get used. > > It is not a DoS attack. The client is almost certainly going to > make those connection attempts anyway if the path is congested > enough to cause the first connection attempt to fail. The only > difference is the application gives up in 30 seconds rather than > 60 or 90 seconds by doing the attempts serially. 150...250ms ?! For a satellite link you already have started 3 parallel connects in non-congested(!) situations. just some random IPv4 pings from my office (in germany) _without_congestion_: ping www.asus.com.tw 300-380ms ping south-america.pool.ntp.org 280-370ms ping oceania.pool.ntp.org 340-420ms ping www.eff.org 160-170ms ping www.ietf79.cn 330-450ms ping www.ietf76.jp 270-370ms So your approach is already hurting the network without congestion! -Martin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf