Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
The problem can be solved by carefully designing connection
establishment protocols to support multiple addresses of a
host, which means no solution exists at the connectionless
layer of IP.
Modified TCP, which send multiple SYN to several addresses
of a peer helps a lot to reduce timeout.
I am pretty sure we can fix the problem if we are prepared to adapt
the stack somewhat.
FYI, modified socket API and TCP with multiple IPv4 and/or IPv6
(optionally with ID/locator separation) addresses was designed
and implemented several years ago.
It's not very hard unless you desperately try to solve the problem
at the connectionless IP layer.
But, I see no point to insist on IPv6 with a lot of wrong design
choices.
The alternative is to do nothing and let various people hack the stack
up completely with meat axes and then we will be working round the
consequences for decades.
The alternative is to live with IPv4 with port restriction, which
is a lot more realistic because we can continue to use the
current backbone.
But really, the challenge is that carrier grade NAT works just fine
for the ISPs who have the decision making power here.
While legacy NAT is a form of port restricted IP, lack of end to
end transparency is still a problem.
Masataka Ohta
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf